Wood v R [2009] NSWCCA 39

Wood v R [2009] NSWCCA 39

The trial judge was entitled to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had the necessary intent to inflict grievous bodily harm even though there was no intent to murder, and alcohol consumption did not prevent formation of specific intent. Thus, the conviction was open and should stand.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['malicious Wounding' 'intent to Murder' 'intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' 'appeal Against Conviction']
['criminal Law'] ['malicious Wounding' 'intent to Murder' 'intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm' 'appeal Against Conviction']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the finding of no intent to murder was inconsistent with a finding of intent to inflict grievous bodily harm' 'Whether a guilty verdict on malicious wounding was open on the evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had the necessary intent to inflict grievous bodily harm even though there was no intent to murder, and alcohol consumption did not prevent formation of specific intent. Thus, the conviction was open and should stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • []