Regina v Abbruzzese [2006] NSWCCA 207

Regina v Abbruzzese [2006] NSWCCA 207

Freeman DCJ did not lawfully determine the maintenance or withdrawal of the respondent's guilty pleas because the respondent had only indicated an intention to traverse the pleas and had not provided evidence establishing cause for leave to withdraw them. Since the Crown was entitled to have any such application determined on evidence and according to principle, the entry of not guilty pleas and related trial directions could not stand.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Interlocutory Appeal by the Crown / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Orders Entering Pleas of Not Guilty and Fixing the Matter for Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'traversing Plea on Sentence' 'procedural Regularity' 'arraignment on Indictment']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'traversing Plea on Sentence' 'procedural Regularity' 'arraignment on Indictment']

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 Interlocutory Appeal by the Crown / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Orders Entering Pleas of Not Guilty and Fixing the Matter for Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the District Court lawfully determined the respondent's application for leave to withdraw pleas of guilty." 'Whether the District Court could enter pleas of not guilty without evidence supporting withdrawal of the guilty pleas.' 'Whether Criminal Procedure Act 1986 s 106 applied after pleas of guilty had been made upon arraignment on indictment.']

Ratio Decidendi

Freeman DCJ did not lawfully determine the maintenance or withdrawal of the respondent's guilty pleas because the respondent had only indicated an intention to traverse the pleas and had not provided evidence establishing cause for leave to withdraw them. Since the Crown was entitled to have any such application determined on evidence and according to principle, the entry of not guilty pleas and related trial directions could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Orders for entry of pleas of not guilty on behalf of the respondent and ancillary orders, together with the directions in respect of fixing a trial date made by Freeman DCJ on 13 April 2006, quashed.' 'Matter remitted to the District Court to be dealt with according to law.']