REGINA v PLV [2001] NSWCCA 282

REGINA v PLV [2001] NSWCCA 282

The appeal against conviction failed because the corroborative evidence of the younger brother provided a rational basis for the jury to convict on Count 5 despite acquitting on the other counts; any inadequacy in the Longman/Crampton delay direction caused no miscarriage because the jury did not convict on the complainant's evidence alone; no further warning about youthful recollection was required in the circumstances; and the proposed new evidence was both insufficient to create a significant possibility of acquittal and, alternatively, inadmissible under the Evidence Act 1995 credibility rule. The sentence appeal failed because no sentencing error was shown and the sentence of two...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sexual Offences' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'delay in Complaint' 'jury Directions' 'unreliability Warning' 'fresh Evidence' 'credibility Rule' 'sentence for Historical Offences']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'sentencing'] ['sexual Offences' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'delay in Complaint' 'jury Directions' 'unreliability Warning' 'fresh Evidence' 'credibility Rule' 'sentence for Historical Offences']

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 and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the guilty verdict on Count 5 was unreasonable having regard to acquittals on the other five counts.' "Whether the trial judge's directions about delay in complaint and trial were inadequate under Longman v The Queen and Crampton v The Queen." 'Whether a warning about the potential unreliability of evidence recalled from childhood was required under s165 of the Evidence Act 1995 or the general law.' 'Whether new evidence concerning alleged recently recovered memory was admissible and capable of producing a significant possibility of acquittal.' 'Whether sentence should be imposed according to standards at the time of the offence or at the time of conviction.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction failed because the corroborative evidence of the younger brother provided a rational basis for the jury to convict on Count 5 despite acquitting on the other counts; any inadequacy in the Longman/Crampton delay direction caused no miscarriage because the jury did not convict on the complainant's evidence alone; no further warning about youthful recollection was required in the circumstances; and the proposed new evidence was both insufficient to create a significant possibility of acquittal and, alternatively, inadmissible under the Evidence Act 1995 credibility rule. The sentence appeal failed because no sentencing error was shown and the sentence of two...

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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