R v Potier [2001] NSWCCA 404

R v Potier [2001] NSWCCA 404

The rulings challenged by the applicant were rulings on the admissibility of evidence at the trial. Consistently with authority, such rulings are not interlocutory judgments or orders within s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act, so the Court should not review them during the course of the trial and leave to appeal should...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act / Application to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Evidentiary Rulings Made During Trial Proceedings
Outcome
Appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act' 'interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'undercover Police Evidence' 'tape Recordings and Transcripts' 'solicit to Murder']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act' 'interlocutory Judgment or Order' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'undercover Police Evidence' 'tape Recordings and Transcripts' 'solicit to Murder']

Source-derived case record

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Under S 5 F of the Criminal Appeal Act / Application to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Evidentiary Rulings Made During Trial Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether rulings by the trial judge on the admissibility of evidence were interlocutory judgments or orders within the meaning of s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act.' "Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s 5F(3)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act in relation to the trial judge's evidentiary rulings."]

Ratio Decidendi

The rulings challenged by the applicant were rulings on the admissibility of evidence at the trial. Consistently with authority, such rulings are not interlocutory judgments or orders within s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act, so the Court should not review them during the course of the trial and leave to appeal should be refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.']