HIGGINS [2007] NSWSC 848

HIGGINS [2007] NSWSC 848

The alleged investigative defects, inconsistencies, missing evidence and asserted fresh evidence did not raise any doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt or produce any sense of disquiet about the verdict. The Crown's circumstantial case was considerable: the applicant was in the optimum position to fraudulently endorse and negotiate the cheque, arranged the issue and cashing of the eight bank cheques, and the surrounding evidence amply supported the jury's verdict. The sentence aspect was refused because no application for leave to appeal against sentence had been made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Application Under Part 7 of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 for an Inquiry and Review of Conviction and Sentence / On Written Submissions After Conviction and Sentence in the District Court and Dismissal of Conviction and Crown Sentence Appeals
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['post Conviction Inquiry and Review' 'fraudulently Omitting to Account' 'adequacy of Investigation' 'fresh Evidence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'admissibility of Interviews']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['post Conviction Inquiry and Review' 'fraudulently Omitting to Account' 'adequacy of Investigation' 'fresh Evidence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'admissibility of Interviews']

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

Application Under Part 7 of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 for an Inquiry and Review of Conviction and Sentence / On Written Submissions After Conviction and Sentence in the District Court and Dismissal of Conviction and Crown Sentence Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether there was a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt, mitigating circumstances, or any part of the evidence warranting an inquiry or referral to the Court of Criminal Appeal under Part 7 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001." "Whether alleged inadequacies in the CBA and NSW Police investigations raised a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt." "Whether inaccurate or inconsistent evidence at trial, evidence not produced at trial, or alleged fresh evidence raised a doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt." 'Whether the sentence aspect of the application should be considered where no application for leave to appeal against sentence had been made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged investigative defects, inconsistencies, missing evidence and asserted fresh evidence did not raise any doubt or question as to the applicant's guilt or produce any sense of disquiet about the verdict. The Crown's circumstantial case was considerable: the applicant was in the optimum position to fraudulently endorse and negotiate the cheque, arranged the issue and cashing of the eight bank cheques, and the surrounding evidence amply supported the jury's verdict. The sentence aspect was refused because no application for leave to appeal against sentence had been made.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']