Rosenburg v R [2016] NSWCCA 292

Rosenburg v R [2016] NSWCCA 292

The conviction appeal failed because it was open to the jury to convict: the complainant was unshaken on the essential matters, her account was strongly supported by contemporaneous complaints and evidence of distress, the Crown case was overwhelming, and the alternative version advanced by the applicant was incredible. The claim of incompetent trial representation failed because counsel exercised appropriate professional forensic judgment and the alleged scam or deception had no evidentiary foundation. The sentence appeal failed because no grounds or submissions were advanced, the sentencing judge carefully reviewed the relevant material, no specific error was identified, and the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'indecent Assault' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'competence of Trial Representation' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'manifest Excess' 'aggregate Sentence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'indecent Assault' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'competence of Trial Representation' 'extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal' 'manifest Excess' 'aggregate Sentence']

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 and Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended for filing the Application for Leave to Appeal.' 'Whether leave should be granted to appeal against conviction and sentence.' 'Whether the verdicts were unreasonable or could not be supported having regard to the evidence under s 6(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant was incompetently represented at trial, causing a miscarriage of justice or denying him a fair opportunity of acquittal.' 'Whether any error was shown in the sentencing judgment or whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction appeal failed because it was open to the jury to convict: the complainant was unshaken on the essential matters, her account was strongly supported by contemporaneous complaints and evidence of distress, the Crown case was overwhelming, and the alternative version advanced by the applicant was incredible. The claim of incompetent trial representation failed because counsel exercised appropriate professional forensic judgment and the alleged scam or deception had no evidentiary foundation. The sentence appeal failed because no grounds or submissions were advanced, the sentencing judge carefully reviewed the relevant material, no specific error was identified, and the...

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Extend time for the filing of the Application for Leave to Appeal to 1 July 2016.' 'Grant leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']