R v BLICK [2000] NSWCCA 61

R v BLICK [2000] NSWCCA 61

The photographic identification had low probative value because the victim had likely been alerted by being shown the recovered bum bag, his recollection significantly included a goatee beard, only the appellant's photograph showed a man with a goatee beard, and that photograph differed in shape and size from the others. The danger of unfair prejudice was substantial because the identification fixed the appellant's image in the victim's mind and was essential to the Crown case. Under s137 of the Evidence Act 1995 the evidence had to be rejected, so the conviction was quashed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Armed Robbery / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From a District Court Conviction After Jury Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; judgment and verdict of acquittal directed.
Legal Topics
['photographic Identification Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence Under S137 of the Evidence Act 1995' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' 'miscarriage of Justice']
['criminal Law and Procedure' 'evidence'] ['photographic Identification Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence Under S137 of the Evidence Act 1995' 'probative Value and Unfair Prejudice' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Armed Robbery / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From a District Court Conviction After Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred in admitting the victim's photographic identification evidence under s137 of the Evidence Act 1995." 'Whether the probative value of the photographic identification evidence was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the appellant.' 'Whether admission of the identification evidence resulted in a miscarriage of justice requiring the conviction to be quashed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The photographic identification had low probative value because the victim had likely been alerted by being shown the recovered bum bag, his recollection significantly included a goatee beard, only the appellant's photograph showed a man with a goatee beard, and that photograph differed in shape and size from the others. The danger of unfair prejudice was substantial because the identification fixed the appellant's image in the victim's mind and was essential to the Crown case. Under s137 of the Evidence Act 1995 the evidence had to be rejected, so the conviction was quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; judgment and verdict of acquittal directed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed' 'Quash the conviction of the appellant' 'Direct that a judgment and verdict of acquittal be entered']