R v Gleeson and Moore [2002] NSWCCA 466

R v Gleeson and Moore [2002] NSWCCA 466

The cumulative circumstantial and identification evidence, including multiple identifications of Mr Gleeson and evidence linking Mr Moore as his companion, provided ample material on which the jury could conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants committed the robbery. The failure to call or direct the jury about Jay Grant and Jodie Watson did not adversely affect the appellants and did not cause a miscarriage of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions for Robbery in Company
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
['robbery in Company' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'identification Evidence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'failure to Call Witnesses' 'jury Directions']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['robbery in Company' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'identification Evidence' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'failure to Call Witnesses' 'jury Directions']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions for Robbery in Company

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's verdicts were unreasonable having regard to the evidence." "Whether the Crown's failure to call two potential witnesses, and the trial judge's failure to give directions about their absence, caused a miscarriage of justice."]

Ratio Decidendi

The cumulative circumstantial and identification evidence, including multiple identifications of Mr Gleeson and evidence linking Mr Moore as his companion, provided ample material on which the jury could conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants committed the robbery. The failure to call or direct the jury about Jay Grant and Jodie Watson did not adversely affect the appellants and did not cause a miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeals dismissed']