Williams v R [2021] NSWCCA 25

Williams v R [2021] NSWCCA 25

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge provided sufficiently robust and legally appropriate directions regarding the complainant’s evidence; did not err in declining to give a Murray direction or a further s 165 warning; appropriately weighed the DNA evidence; correctly applied the onus and standard of proof; and it was open to the trial judge to convict on the evidence, excluding all reasonable hypotheses consistent with innocence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal granted; sentence adjusted per statutory requirements.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'judge Alone Trial' 'evidentiary Directions' 'dna Evidence' 'onus of Proof']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'judge Alone Trial' 'evidentiary Directions' 'dna Evidence' 'onus of Proof']

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, Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred by failing to give a Murray direction in respect of the complainant's evidence" "Whether a warning pursuant to s 165 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) was required in respect of the complainant's evidence" 'Whether the trial judge failed to properly consider DNA evidence and its impact on identification' 'Whether the verdict was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence' 'Whether the trial judge misapplied the onus of proof']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge provided sufficiently robust and legally appropriate directions regarding the complainant’s evidence; did not err in declining to give a Murray direction or a further s 165 warning; appropriately weighed the DNA evidence; correctly applied the onus and standard of proof; and it was open to the trial judge to convict on the evidence, excluding all reasonable hypotheses consistent with innocence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; leave to appeal granted; sentence adjusted per statutory requirements.

Orders

  • ['Reject the affidavit of Ben Cochrane affirmed 1 February 2021 on the ground of relevance.' 'Grant leave to the appellant to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.' "Pursuant to s 28A(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), the applicant's sentence is to recommence on 3 March 2021." 'For the purpose of s 18(2) of the...