Rubasha v R [2021] NSWCCA 319

Rubasha v R [2021] NSWCCA 319

Because the Crown framed and conducted its case as requiring proof that the object of the conspiracy was to rob a person at Karuah Street, Greenacre, it had to prove that particular object beyond reasonable doubt. The surveillance and CCTV evidence did not exclude the reasonably open inference that the planned robbery concerned a house on another street, such as Maiden Street, rather than Karuah Street. It was therefore not reasonably open to the jury to convict on the indictment, making the verdict unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. Although the evidence was sufficient to prove the Applicant's participation in a conspiracy to rob, and the trial judge's response to the jury...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 5(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Against Conviction for Conspiracy to Rob Whilst Armed With a Dangerous Weapon / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision on Conviction Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; acquittal entered.
Legal Topics
['conspiracy to Rob' 'armed Robbery' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'indictment Confined to Particular Location']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['conspiracy to Rob' 'armed Robbery' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'indictment Confined to Particular Location']

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

Appeal Under S 5(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Against Conviction for Conspiracy to Rob Whilst Armed With a Dangerous Weapon / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision on Conviction Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable or unable to be supported by the evidence having regard to the Crown's pleaded and conducted case that the object of the conspiracy was to rob a person at Karuah Street, Greenacre." 'Whether it was reasonably open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the Applicant was a participant in a conspiracy to rob.' "Whether the trial judge's response to the jury's question about the importance of Karuah Street occasioned a miscarriage of justice."]

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Crown framed and conducted its case as requiring proof that the object of the conspiracy was to rob a person at Karuah Street, Greenacre, it had to prove that particular object beyond reasonable doubt. The surveillance and CCTV evidence did not exclude the reasonably open inference that the planned robbery concerned a house on another street, such as Maiden Street, rather than Karuah Street. It was therefore not reasonably open to the jury to convict on the indictment, making the verdict unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. Although the evidence was sufficient to prove the Applicant's participation in a conspiracy to rob, and the trial judge's response to the jury...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction set aside; acquittal entered.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to the Applicant to raise grounds 1 and 2 of the Appeal;' 'Appeal allowed;' 'Set aside the conviction on 18 February 2021 for conspiracy to rob whilst armed with a dangerous weapon;' 'In lieu thereof, order that an acquittal be entered.']