REGINA v. MERRITT [2003] NSWCCA 14

REGINA v. MERRITT [2003] NSWCCA 14

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant gave no adequate basis for the long delay and, more importantly, the proposed appeal had no substance: the prior remarks of Wood, CJ at CL did not taint the convictions or enliven any inquiry, and the circumstantial evidence, including fingerprint and medical evidence, made it entirely open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Application for Extension of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Convictions in the Sydney District Court
Outcome
The application for extension of time is refused.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'extension of Time' 'armed Robbery' 'unsafe or Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'extension of Time' 'armed Robbery' 'unsafe or Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'circumstantial 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Application for Extension of Time / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Convictions in the Sydney District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time should be extended to permit the applicant to appeal against his convictions.' "Whether the applicant's proposed appeal had any substance or merit." "Whether the jury's verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence." 'Whether remarks made by Wood, CJ at CL on an earlier appeal tainted the later convictions or required an inquiry.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time was refused because the applicant gave no adequate basis for the long delay and, more importantly, the proposed appeal had no substance: the prior remarks of Wood, CJ at CL did not taint the convictions or enliven any inquiry, and the circumstantial evidence, including fingerprint and medical evidence, made it entirely open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt.

Court Disposition

The application for extension of time is refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for extension of time is refused.']