Regina v Garry Andrew Bayliss [2001] NSWSC 732

Regina v Garry Andrew Bayliss [2001] NSWSC 732

There was no legitimate doubt or question as to the applicant’s guilt, mitigating circumstances, or any part of the evidence as required to grant an inquiry under section 474E(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The discharge of the first and fourth charges did not preclude prosecution for the remaining summary offences, and there was no jurisdictional or procedural error in the subsequent proceedings or sentencing by the District Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Inquiry Into Conviction and Sentence Under S 474 D of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw)
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
['inquiry Into Conviction and Sentence' 'autrefois Acquit' 'summary Offences' 'apprehended Violence Order' 'jurisdiction' 'sentence Appeal']
['criminal Law'] ['inquiry Into Conviction and Sentence' 'autrefois Acquit' 'summary Offences' 'apprehended Violence Order' 'jurisdiction' 'sentence Appeal']

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 / Application for Inquiry Into Conviction and Sentence Under S 474 D of the Crimes Act 1900 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr. Bayliss is entitled to an inquiry into his convictions and sentences imposed on 31 August 1999' 'Whether prior discharge on indictable offences precludes trial on summary offences on the basis of autrefois acquit' 'Whether the Local Court had jurisdiction to try the summary offences after discharge on related indictable offences' 'Whether procedural irregularities or miscarriage of justice occurred in connection with representation or the imposition of sentence']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no legitimate doubt or question as to the applicant’s guilt, mitigating circumstances, or any part of the evidence as required to grant an inquiry under section 474E(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The discharge of the first and fourth charges did not preclude prosecution for the remaining summary offences, and there was no jurisdictional or procedural error in the subsequent proceedings or sentencing by the District Court.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • []