Safi v R [2018] NSWCCA 134

Safi v R [2018] NSWCCA 134

The appellant's conviction was unsafe because the jury was directed in terms of extended joint criminal enterprise, a basis not relied on by the Crown, and the written directions allowed a conviction without proof of the necessary agreement to commit murder with the relevant intention. The directions imposed a lesser burden and failed to secure a jury determination of an essential element. Leave to appeal was granted, and the proviso rejected due to substantial miscarriage of justice.

Parties
Appellant: Hanna Safi; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed, conviction set aside, new trial ordered
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Joint Criminal Enterprise, Misdirection, Jury Directions, Criminal Appeal Rules R 4, Criminal Appeal Act S 6
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Joint Criminal Enterprise Misdirection Jury Directions Criminal Appeal Rules R 4 Criminal Appeal Act S 6

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hanna Safi

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on extended joint criminal enterprise when the Crown case was framed in terms of joint criminal enterprise
  2. 2 Whether the directions misrepresented the Crown case and imposed a lesser burden
  3. 3 Whether leave should be granted to appeal under Criminal Appeal Rules r 4

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's conviction was unsafe because the jury was directed in terms of extended joint criminal enterprise, a basis not relied on by the Crown, and the written directions allowed a conviction without proof of the necessary agreement to commit murder with the relevant intention. The directions imposed a lesser burden and failed to secure a jury determination of an essential element. Leave to appeal was granted, and the proviso rejected due to substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, conviction set aside, new trial ordered

Orders

  • The time within which to file a Notice of Appeal be extended to 31 October 2017.
  • Appeal allowed.