R v Fletcher [2005] NSWCCA 338

R v Fletcher [2005] NSWCCA 338

By majority, it was open to the trial judge to conclude that the tendency evidence of GG was admissible, having significant probative value, and that its probative value substantially outweighed its prejudicial effect. The evidence was relevant to all counts on the indictment as it supported a pattern of behaviour by the appellant regarding adolescent boys. There was no error of law in its admission, nor did its admission result in a miscarriage of justice. The appeal against conviction was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: James Patrick Fletcher; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (by majority – Rothman J dissenting)
Legal Topics
Tendency Evidence, Coincidence Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Sexual Offences, Probative Value Vs Prejudicial Effect, Criminal Procedure
Criminal Law Evidence Tendency Evidence Coincidence Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Sexual Offences Probative Value Vs Prejudicial Effect Criminal Procedure

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 38 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Patrick Fletcher

Applicant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting tendency evidence under s97/s101 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the admitted evidence had significant probative value
  3. 3 Whether the probative value substantially outweighed its prejudicial effect

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, it was open to the trial judge to conclude that the tendency evidence of GG was admissible, having significant probative value, and that its probative value substantially outweighed its prejudicial effect. The evidence was relevant to all counts on the indictment as it supported a pattern of behaviour by the appellant regarding adolescent boys. There was no error of law in its admission, nor did its admission result in a miscarriage of justice. The appeal against conviction was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (by majority – Rothman J dissenting)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed