REGINA v LISA BEVAN [2002] NSWCCA 224

REGINA v LISA BEVAN [2002] NSWCCA 224

The trial miscarried because the Crown put before the jury, in breach of s 44 of the Evidence Act, material suggesting that the appellant and her husband had substantial unexplained wealth and may have laundered illicit proceeds through poker machines. That material was not sufficiently linked to the $3000 bank balance or to the charged events, was left with the jury without corrective direction, and may have affected the jury's assessment of the appellant's credibility. The proviso was not applied despite the strong Crown case.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Drug Supply Offences / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Convictions After Jury Trial
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Convictions set aside and a new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['drug Supply Offences' 'ongoing Supply of Methylamphetamine' 'deemed Supply' 'cross Examination' 'evidence Act S 44' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'proviso']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['drug Supply Offences' 'ongoing Supply of Methylamphetamine' 'deemed Supply' 'cross Examination' 'evidence Act S 44' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'proviso']

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 Drug Supply Offences / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Convictions After Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether improper cross-examination about family assets and poker machine turnover caused a miscarriage of justice.' 'Whether the cross-examination breached s 44 of the Evidence Act.' 'Whether the trial judge erred by refusing to discharge the jury or direct the jury to disregard the impugned cross-examination.' 'Whether the proviso should be applied despite the strength of the Crown case.']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial miscarried because the Crown put before the jury, in breach of s 44 of the Evidence Act, material suggesting that the appellant and her husband had substantial unexplained wealth and may have laundered illicit proceeds through poker machines. That material was not sufficiently linked to the $3000 bank balance or to the charged events, was left with the jury without corrective direction, and may have affected the jury's assessment of the appellant's credibility. The proviso was not applied despite the strong Crown case.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Convictions set aside and a new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is upheld.' 'The convictions are set aside.' 'A new trial is ordered.']