R v Raymundo Antonio ORELLANA [2009] NSWDC 434

The evidence against the accused was not insufficiently cogent and did not reveal serious weakness in the Crown case, such that it was not appropriate to give a Prasad direction.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 10 August 2009
Procedural Posture: Criminal Trial / Application for Prasad Direction After Close of Crown Case
Outcome: Application for Prasad direction refused
Legal Topics: ['importation of Marketable Quantity of Cocaine' 'prasad Direction' 'weight of Evidence']

['criminal Law'] ['importation of Marketable Quantity of Cocaine' 'prasad Direction' 'weight of Evidence']

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

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Application for Prasad Direction After Close of Crown Case

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether a Prasad direction should be given to the jury at the close of the Crown case' 'Assessment of the cogency and weaknesses of Crown evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence against the accused was not insufficiently cogent and did not reveal serious weakness in the Crown case, such that it was not appropriate to give a Prasad direction.

Court Disposition

Application for Prasad direction refused

Orders

['Application for Prasad direction is refused']