R v Leroy and R v Graham [2000] NSWCCA 302

R v Leroy and R v Graham [2000] NSWCCA 302

It was reasonable for the trial judge to admit the identification evidence as it was not practical or reasonable to conduct an identification parade, and detailed directions to the jury sufficiently addressed any deficiencies. The jury's verdicts were open on the evidence, and the sentences imposed, including cumulative terms, were within the proper discretion given the seriousness of the offences and special circumstances found.

Parties
Appellant: Matthew John Leroy; Appellant: Colin Kenneth Graham; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals against conviction dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence granted (Graham); appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Affray, Maliciously Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm, Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm, Admissibility of Identification Evidence, Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence, Manifestly Excessive Sentence, Special Circumstances Sentencing, Cumulative Sentences, Relationship Between Minimum and Additional Terms
Criminal Law Evidence Affray Maliciously Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Admissibility of Identification Evidence Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence +4 more

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew John Leroy

Appellant

Colin Kenneth Graham

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether identification evidence was wrongly admitted under Evidence Act provisions
  2. 2 Whether the jury verdicts were unreasonable and could not be supported by evidence
  3. 3 Whether the sentencing judge erred in fixing the minimum and additional terms and in making sentences cumulative

Ratio Decidendi

It was reasonable for the trial judge to admit the identification evidence as it was not practical or reasonable to conduct an identification parade, and detailed directions to the jury sufficiently addressed any deficiencies. The jury's verdicts were open on the evidence, and the sentences imposed, including cumulative terms, were within the proper discretion given the seriousness of the offences and special circumstances found.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence granted (Graham); appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeals against convictions dismissed.
  • Appellant Graham granted leave to appeal against sentence, but appeal dismissed.