HO v R [2023] NSWCCA 245

HO v R [2023] NSWCCA 245

The appeal was dismissed because no miscarriage of justice or error of law was established. The refusal of a temporary stay was correct because the applicant did not identify any practical injustice or forensic disadvantage from the alleged inadequacy of the investigation, had access to known material, and the Crown had no duty to investigate or present his case. The ruling excluding a question about the complainant's relationship with Mr AS was a proper application of s 293 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), and the applicant was not prevented from exploring any admissible business relationship evidence. On the whole record, the inconsistencies and matters relied on by the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction in the Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Convictions
Outcome
Extension of time granted, leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'physical Assault' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdict' 'temporary Stay of Proceedings' 'adequacy of Police Investigation' 'crown Obligation to Call Witnesses' 'evidence Implying Sexual Experience' 'complainant Credibility' 'mixed Verdicts']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'physical Assault' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdict' 'temporary Stay of Proceedings' 'adequacy of Police Investigation' 'crown Obligation to Call Witnesses' 'evidence Implying Sexual Experience' 'complainant Credibility' 'mixed Verdicts']

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 From District Court Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time to bring the application for leave to appeal against conviction should be extended.' 'Whether leave to appeal against conviction should be granted.' 'Whether the jury verdicts were unreasonable, uncertain, unsatisfactory, or incapable of being supported by the evidence.' 'Whether the trial miscarried because the trial judge refused to stay the prosecution pending further investigation of matters raised by the applicant.' "Whether the trial judge erred by excluding a question about the complainant's relationship with Mr AS under s 293 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because no miscarriage of justice or error of law was established. The refusal of a temporary stay was correct because the applicant did not identify any practical injustice or forensic disadvantage from the alleged inadequacy of the investigation, had access to known material, and the Crown had no duty to investigate or present his case. The ruling excluding a question about the complainant's relationship with Mr AS was a proper application of s 293 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), and the applicant was not prevented from exploring any admissible business relationship evidence. On the whole record, the inconsistencies and matters relied on by the...

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted, leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Extend the time in which to bring an application for leave to appeal against conviction until 7 February 2023;' 'Grant leave to appeal;' 'Dismiss the appeal.']