R v Macris [2004] NSWCCA 261

R v Macris [2004] NSWCCA 261

The appeal was upheld because the trial judge's direction about the appellant's failure to give evidence was deficient: it did not warn the jury that the appellant's silence could not be used to fill gaps in the prosecution evidence or as a make-weight in assessing whether the Crown had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. That omission created the possibility of real injustice, so leave under rule 4 was granted and Ground 2 succeeded. The other grounds failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences From the District Court to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences quashed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['drug Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Drugs' 'jury Directions' "accused's Failure to Give Evidence" 'right to Silence' 'no Comment Answers' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'new Trial']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['drug Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Drugs' 'jury Directions' "accused's Failure to Give Evidence" 'right to Silence' 'no Comment Answers' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'new Trial']

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 / Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences From the District Court to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge's directions to the jury on how to consider the evidence of the witness John Christopher were erroneous and inadequate." "Whether the directions to the jury about the appellant's failure to give evidence were inadequate, particularly after the jury asked why the appellant was not put on the stand." "Whether parts of the transcript recording the appellant's 'no comment' answers during execution of the search warrant were wrongly admitted." 'Whether evidence about white powder in a coffee grinder caused a miscarriage of justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was upheld because the trial judge's direction about the appellant's failure to give evidence was deficient: it did not warn the jury that the appellant's silence could not be used to fill gaps in the prosecution evidence or as a make-weight in assessing whether the Crown had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. That omission created the possibility of real injustice, so leave under rule 4 was granted and Ground 2 succeeded. The other grounds failed.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; convictions and sentences quashed; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Appeal upheld.' 'Convictions and sentences quashed.' 'New trial ordered.']