R v GRAEME JOHN LEE [2021] NSWDC 65

R v GRAEME JOHN LEE [2021] NSWDC 65

Although the magistrate erred in suggesting there was no threat and in not clearly separating the two limbs of self-defence, the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that firing shots 2, 3 and 4 from an awkward position with a high powered rifle toward the tractor, when the appellant did not know where Mr Clay was and the shots likely did not hit the intended radiator target, was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as the appellant perceived them and was with disregard for Mr Clay's safety.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal Under S18 of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw) / District Court Rehearing From a Local Court Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; orders of the lower court confirmed.
Legal Topics
['firearm Offence' 'discharge of Firearm With Disregard for Safety' 'self Defence' 'conviction Appeal' 'appeal by Way of Rehearing']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['firearm Offence' 'discharge of Firearm With Disregard for Safety' 'self Defence' 'conviction Appeal' 'appeal by Way of Rehearing']

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 Conviction Appeal Under S18 of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw) / District Court Rehearing From a Local Court Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant established error in the Local Court decision on a s18 conviction appeal.' 'Whether the Crown negatived self-defence beyond reasonable doubt, particularly whether firing the firearm was a reasonable response in the circumstances as the appellant perceived them.' 'Whether shots 2, 3 and 4 were fired with disregard for the safety of Mark Clay.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the magistrate erred in suggesting there was no threat and in not clearly separating the two limbs of self-defence, the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that firing shots 2, 3 and 4 from an awkward position with a high powered rifle toward the tractor, when the appellant did not know where Mr Clay was and the shots likely did not hit the intended radiator target, was not a reasonable response in the circumstances as the appellant perceived them and was with disregard for Mr Clay's safety.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; orders of the lower court confirmed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.' 'Orders of the lower court confirmed.']