R v ROBINSON [1999] NSWCCA 186

R v ROBINSON [1999] NSWCCA 186

The proposed fresh evidence concerning subsequent dishonesty and criminal conduct of police officers Harding and Potter was not material or cogent; it was too remote in time or lacked substantial probative value to bear on their credibility at the time of the original trial. Accordingly, there is no miscarriage of justice, and the appeal must be dismissed.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Appellant: James Allan Robinson
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Attorney General's Reference
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal, Fresh Evidence, Credibility of Witnesses, Miscarriage of Justice
Criminal Law Appeal Fresh Evidence Credibility of Witnesses Miscarriage of Justice

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

James Allan Robinson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Attorney General's Reference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence shows that the conviction was a miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether evidence about the credibility of police witnesses arising long after the events at trial is material and cogent

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed fresh evidence concerning subsequent dishonesty and criminal conduct of police officers Harding and Potter was not material or cogent; it was too remote in time or lacked substantial probative value to bear on their credibility at the time of the original trial. Accordingly, there is no miscarriage of justice, and the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed