Hoblos v R [2014] NSWCCA 20

Hoblos v R [2014] NSWCCA 20

The verdict was not unreasonable because the applicant's statement to Ms McGeachy that he was involved, together with the timing, sequence and content of intercepted telephone conversations concerning police inquiries, alibis and possible life imprisonment, overwhelmingly manifested consciousness of guilt of participation in the murder. Although his precise role was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, the jury could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he was the shooter, the second intruder or the getaway driver. The directions were not erroneous because there was ample evidence that the driver knew and participated in the carefully planned murder, and it was fanciful to suggest...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction for Murder / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Leave to appeal against conviction granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'aiding and Abetting' 'leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['murder' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'aiding and Abetting' 'leave to Appeal']

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 Against Conviction for Murder / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdict was unreasonable and cannot be supported by the evidence.' "Whether the trial judge's directions to the jury concerning the applicant's liability for murder were wrong, including by leaving the case on the basis that the driver was a party to a joint criminal enterprise."]

Ratio Decidendi

The verdict was not unreasonable because the applicant's statement to Ms McGeachy that he was involved, together with the timing, sequence and content of intercepted telephone conversations concerning police inquiries, alibis and possible life imprisonment, overwhelmingly manifested consciousness of guilt of participation in the murder. Although his precise role was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, the jury could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that he was the shooter, the second intruder or the getaway driver. The directions were not erroneous because there was ample evidence that the driver knew and participated in the carefully planned murder, and it was fanciful to suggest...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against conviction granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against conviction granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']