Quinn v R [2023] NSWCCA 229

Quinn v R [2023] NSWCCA 229

By majority, the conviction was unreasonable because the Crown did not exclude the reasonable possibility that the deceased pointed a gun at the Applicant on the street and that, when she later assisted Davis, she believed Davis had seen that threat and had acted in reasonable defence of her. On that view, the Crown could not prove that she was aware of the essential facts and circumstances making Davis' conduct manslaughter by excessive self-defence. Leave on the consciousness of guilt ground was refused because the impugned post-offence conduct was relied on as circumstantial evidence of Davis' state of mind and no direction was sought at trial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time and leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; conviction quashed; acquittal ordered.
Legal Topics
['accessory After the Fact' 'manslaughter by Excessive Self Defence' 'self Defence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'post Offence Conduct']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['accessory After the Fact' 'manslaughter by Excessive Self Defence' 'self Defence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'post Offence Conduct']

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 Against Conviction / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether a miscarriage of justice arose from the Crown Prosecutor's reliance on consciousness of guilt reasoning in closing address." "Whether the jury's verdict convicting the Applicant of being an accessory after the fact to manslaughter was unreasonable or unable to be supported by the evidence." "Whether the Crown excluded the reasonable possibility that the Applicant believed Davis saw her being threatened with a gun on the street and therefore believed Davis' conduct was a reasonable response to the circumstances as he perceived them."]

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, the conviction was unreasonable because the Crown did not exclude the reasonable possibility that the deceased pointed a gun at the Applicant on the street and that, when she later assisted Davis, she believed Davis had seen that threat and had acted in reasonable defence of her. On that view, the Crown could not prove that she was aware of the essential facts and circumstances making Davis' conduct manslaughter by excessive self-defence. Leave on the consciousness of guilt ground was refused because the impugned post-offence conduct was relied on as circumstantial evidence of Davis' state of mind and no direction was sought at trial.

Court Disposition

Extension of time and leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; conviction quashed; acquittal ordered.

Orders

  • ['Grant an extension of time and leave to appeal.' 'Appeal allowed.' "Quash the Applicant's conviction for the offence of accessory after the fact to manslaughter." 'In lieu thereof, order that the Applicant be acquitted.']