MM v R [2011] NSWCCA 262

MM v R [2011] NSWCCA 262

The evidence, considered as a whole and including medical opinion and the opportunity of the jury to assess witnesses, was sufficient to support the verdicts beyond reasonable doubt. The amendment to the indictment did not occasion unfair prejudice or injustice. No miscarriage of justice resulted and the appeal grounds fail.

Parties
Appellant: MM; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Sexual Offences Against Children, Indictment Amendment, Unreasonable Verdict, Reliability of Evidence
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Sexual Offences Against Children Indictment Amendment Unreasonable Verdict Reliability of Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MM

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by evidence under s 6(1) of Criminal Appeal Act 1912
  2. 2 Whether trial judge erred in granting the Crown leave to amend the indictment to enlarge timeframe of alleged offences
  3. 3 Whether the evidence of the complainant was unreliable

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence, considered as a whole and including medical opinion and the opportunity of the jury to assess witnesses, was sufficient to support the verdicts beyond reasonable doubt. The amendment to the indictment did not occasion unfair prejudice or injustice. No miscarriage of justice resulted and the appeal grounds fail.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction is dismissed.