R v Adler [2000] NSWCCA 357

R v Adler [2000] NSWCCA 357

The Evidence Act 1995 altered the common law position by providing for the reception of voice identification evidence without the threshold considerations applied in the R v Smith line of cases. Because the complainant's evidence was relevant, its admissibility was governed by s 55 and by the discretionary exclusion provisions, with jury warnings under ss 116 and 165. The trial judge did not miscarry in refusing discretionary exclusion, and the prosecution case could not be said to be bound to fail; therefore no basis for a permanent stay or leave to appeal was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Application / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Against Interlocutory Rulings Admitting Voice Identification Evidence and Refusing a Permanent Stay
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['voice Identification Evidence' 'aural Identification' 'admissibility Under the Evidence Act 1995' 'discretionary Exclusion' 'permanent Stay of Proceedings' 'leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['voice Identification Evidence' 'aural Identification' 'admissibility Under the Evidence Act 1995' 'discretionary Exclusion' 'permanent Stay of Proceedings' 'leave to 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 Appeal Application / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Against Interlocutory Rulings Admitting Voice Identification Evidence and Refusing a Permanent Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether voice identification evidence was admissible under the Evidence Act 1995 without satisfying a common law threshold test derived from R v Smith.' "Whether the trial judge's refusal to exclude the voice identification evidence under discretionary provisions miscarried." 'Whether a permanent stay of proceedings should be granted on the basis that the prosecution case was bound to fail.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Evidence Act 1995 altered the common law position by providing for the reception of voice identification evidence without the threshold considerations applied in the R v Smith line of cases. Because the complainant's evidence was relevant, its admissibility was governed by s 55 and by the discretionary exclusion provisions, with jury warnings under ss 116 and 165. The trial judge did not miscarry in refusing discretionary exclusion, and the prosecution case could not be said to be bound to fail; therefore no basis for a permanent stay or leave to appeal was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.']