Finnie v Regina and Regina v Finnie [2007] NSWCCA 38

Finnie v Regina and Regina v Finnie [2007] NSWCCA 38

The appellant's conviction and sentence were upheld because Count 1 stated a known offence, directions to the jury were sufficient and correct, privilege was properly abrogated for evidence of furtherance of an offence, the verdict was reasonable, and the sentence was within the appropriate range and not manifestly excessive. The Crown's sentence appeal was dismissed due to unexplained delay and the sentence not being manifestly inadequate.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Sydney Thomas Finnie; Respondent/appellant: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Conviction Appeal, Sentence Appeal, and Crown Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed; Crown sentence appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Perjury, Sentencing, Bail Application, Evidence—legal Professional Privilege, Appeals—conviction and Sentence
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Perjury Sentencing Bail Application Evidence—legal Professional Privilege Appeals—conviction and Sentence

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sydney Thomas Finnie

Appellant/respondent

Regina

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Conviction Appeal, Sentence Appeal, and Crown Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Count 1 of the indictment disclosed an offence known to law
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's directions on Count 1 were ambiguous or inadequate regarding 'tendency' to pervert justice
  3. 3 Whether it was an error in law or public policy to permit the Crown to call evidence from the appellant's solicitor

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's conviction and sentence were upheld because Count 1 stated a known offence, directions to the jury were sufficient and correct, privilege was properly abrogated for evidence of furtherance of an offence, the verdict was reasonable, and the sentence was within the appropriate range and not manifestly excessive. The Crown's sentence appeal was dismissed due to unexplained delay and the sentence not being manifestly inadequate.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed; Crown sentence appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appellant granted extension of time to prosecute appeal and application for leave to appeal sentence.
  • Appeal against conviction dismissed.