Herbert v R [2014] NSWCCA 105

Herbert v R [2014] NSWCCA 105

No error by the trial judge or miscarriage of justice occurred in respect of the challenged evidentiary and procedural rulings; counsel’s error did not affect the outcome given the strength of the prosecution case; all relevant evidence was disclosed; and there were no grounds upon which the appeal could be sustained.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'unrepresented Appellant' 'incompetence of Counsel' 'introduction of Incriminating Statements' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'prosecution Disclosure' 'intervention of Trial Judge' 'bias' "complainant's Sexual History"]
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'unrepresented Appellant' 'incompetence of Counsel' 'introduction of Incriminating Statements' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'prosecution Disclosure' 'intervention of Trial Judge' 'bias' "complainant's Sexual History"]

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was error by the trial judge in explanation of DNA evidence' 'Whether sufficient evidence regarding appellant’s medication was provided' 'Whether the trial should have been aborted due to the appellant’s health and mental state' 'Whether inadmissible incriminating statements were wrongly introduced' 'Whether there was bias or inappropriate intervention by the trial judge' 'Whether inconsistencies in prosecution evidence were wrongly excluded' 'Whether there was non-disclosure by the prosecution']

Ratio Decidendi

No error by the trial judge or miscarriage of justice occurred in respect of the challenged evidentiary and procedural rulings; counsel’s error did not affect the outcome given the strength of the prosecution case; all relevant evidence was disclosed; and there were no grounds upon which the appeal could be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • []