Miles v R [2014] NSWCCA 72

Miles v R [2014] NSWCCA 72

Extension of time to appeal should be refused as there was no substantial injustice demonstrated; delay was lengthy and largely unexplained; grounds alleged minor irregularities but evidence overwhelmingly supported convictions and maintenance of verdicts occasioned no substantial miscarriage of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Conviction
Outcome
Extension of time to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'extension of Time' 'directions to Jury' 'evidence of Flight' 'principle in Palmer V the Queen' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'tendency Evidence' 'good Character Evidence' 'proviso in Criminal Appeal Act']

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 / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Conviction

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time to appeal conviction should be granted' "Whether trial judge's directions violated the principle in Palmer v The Queen" 'Whether evidence of flight should have been admitted or adequately directed' 'Whether verdicts were rationally irreconcilable' 'Whether tendency evidence was improperly used or directed' 'Whether applicant should have benefited from good character evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

Extension of time to appeal should be refused as there was no substantial injustice demonstrated; delay was lengthy and largely unexplained; grounds alleged minor irregularities but evidence overwhelmingly supported convictions and maintenance of verdicts occasioned no substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Extension of time to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal out of time refused']