Clark v R [2014] NSWCCA 236

Clark v R [2014] NSWCCA 236

No miscarriage of justice occurred by reason of the matters raised by the applicant. The failure to call the police officer, absence or alleged concealment of exculpatory statements, admission of prior convictions, and other procedural objections did not individually or collectively deprive the applicant of a fair trial. The applicant's own decisions at trial, taken with clear judicial warnings, led to the prejudicial material being admitted. The applicant was found by the jury to have intentionally made the tape recordings unavailable to the court to pervert the course of justice, and the evidence supported the verdict. Granting leave to appeal on the developed grounds, the appeal is...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed after granting leave on certain grounds; application to reopen dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'disclosure Obligations' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'disclosure Obligations' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'miscarriage of Justice']

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

Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether failure to call a police officer alleged to be recorded led to a miscarriage of justice' 'Whether there was a failure by the Crown to comply with its duty of disclosure' "Whether error occurred in the admission of the appellant's prior convictions before the jury" 'Whether other alleged procedural or evidentiary errors resulted in a miscarriage of justice']

Ratio Decidendi

No miscarriage of justice occurred by reason of the matters raised by the applicant. The failure to call the police officer, absence or alleged concealment of exculpatory statements, admission of prior convictions, and other procedural objections did not individually or collectively deprive the applicant of a fair trial. The applicant's own decisions at trial, taken with clear judicial warnings, led to the prejudicial material being admitted. The applicant was found by the jury to have intentionally made the tape recordings unavailable to the court to pervert the course of justice, and the evidence supported the verdict. Granting leave to appeal on the developed grounds, the appeal is...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed after granting leave on certain grounds; application to reopen dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to raise proposed grounds 4.2 and 5 refused.' 'Otherwise grant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.' 'Application to reopen dismissed.']