Standen v Regina [2015] NSWCCA 211

Standen v Regina [2015] NSWCCA 211

The trial judge did not err in admitting evidence under s 137 Evidence Act, as the evidence was relevant and not unfairly prejudicial; directions given to the jury adequately explained conspiracy elements and the requirement that the accused and another party hold the required belief at the same time; no miscarriage of justice arose from the refusal to dismiss the jury or from the summing-up; the sentence for Count 2 was not manifestly excessive given its distinct elements, maximum penalty, and specific conduct; the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Mark William Standen; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Conviction and Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted but appeal dismissed; leave to amend ground of appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Drug Offences, Admission of Evidence, Sentencing, Procedure for Lengthy Trial, Jury Discharge, Summing Up Fairness
Criminal Law Conspiracy Drug Offences Admission of Evidence Sentencing Procedure for Lengthy Trial Jury Discharge Summing Up Fairness

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 6 Authorities cited 33 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark William Standen

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Conviction and Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether there was a miscarriage of justice due to jury directions on conspiracy elements under ss 307.11 and 11.5 Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
  3. 3 Whether trial judge erred in failing to dismiss the jury due to trial length

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in admitting evidence under s 137 Evidence Act, as the evidence was relevant and not unfairly prejudicial; directions given to the jury adequately explained conspiracy elements and the requirement that the accused and another party hold the required belief at the same time; no miscarriage of justice arose from the refusal to dismiss the jury or from the summing-up; the sentence for Count 2 was not manifestly excessive given its distinct elements, maximum penalty, and specific conduct; the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted but appeal dismissed; leave to amend ground of appeal refused.

Orders

  • Refuse appellant leave to amend Ground 3.
  • Dismiss appeal against conviction.