Yacoub v R [2008] NSWCCA 164

Yacoub v R [2008] NSWCCA 164

After examining the entire trial record, the Court held that it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant wounded the victim with intent to kill her. The Crown case depended essentially on the victim's evidence, and if the jury accepted her evidence on the critical issues a conviction was inevitable. The inconsistencies in her account and the matters raised by the appellant, whether considered alone or collectively, did not make the verdict unreasonable or raise a reasonable doubt in the face of the victim's account and the supporting evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Attempted Murder / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Conviction After Jury Trial in the District Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'attempted Murder' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'self Inflicted Injuries' 'consciousness of Guilt']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'attempted Murder' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'self Inflicted Injuries' 'consciousness of Guilt']

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 for Attempted Murder / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From Conviction After Jury Trial in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the jury verdict convicting the appellant of attempted murder was unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence.' "Whether the victim's injuries were self-inflicted rather than inflicted by the appellant."]

Ratio Decidendi

After examining the entire trial record, the Court held that it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant wounded the victim with intent to kill her. The Crown case depended essentially on the victim's evidence, and if the jury accepted her evidence on the critical issues a conviction was inevitable. The inconsistencies in her account and the matters raised by the appellant, whether considered alone or collectively, did not make the verdict unreasonable or raise a reasonable doubt in the face of the victim's account and the supporting evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to argue the unreasonable verdict ground granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']