GAR – Application for an inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2016] NSWSC 1205

GAR – Application for an inquiry into conviction pursuant to s 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 [2016] NSWSC 1205

The application was dismissed because the statements relied upon were deemed not to create a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt; the credibility of E and ER had been fully explored and resolved adversely to the applicant both at trial and in previous appeal proceedings, and their subsequent recantations did not displace those findings.

Parties
Applicant: GAR; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Inquiry Into Conviction / Dismissal of Application for Inquiry Into Conviction Under Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 S 78
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Inquiry Into Conviction, Fresh Evidence, Recantation of Evidence, Credibility of Witnesses
Criminal Law Inquiry Into Conviction Fresh Evidence Recantation of Evidence Credibility of Witnesses

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GAR

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Inquiry Into Conviction / Dismissal of Application for Inquiry Into Conviction Under Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 S 78

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence creates a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt within the meaning of s 79(2) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001
  2. 2 Whether new statements by witnesses undermine the conviction so as to justify an inquiry into the conviction

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the statements relied upon were deemed not to create a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt; the credibility of E and ER had been fully explored and resolved adversely to the applicant both at trial and in previous appeal proceedings, and their subsequent recantations did not displace those findings.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed.