Can v R [2007] NSWCCA 176

Can v R [2007] NSWCCA 176

The trial judge did not err in admitting the photographic identification or com-fit evidence; telephone records/SIM card evidence was relevant and properly admitted; there was no admissible fresh evidence or miscarriage of justice; the verdict was open to the jury based on identification and circumstantial evidence; no misdirection or inadequacy of jury directions; sentence imposed was within discretion and not excessive.

Parties
Applicant/appellant: Vural Can; Respondent: R (Regina)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (court of Criminal Appeal, Nsw)
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Photographic Identification, Com Fit Images, Admission of Evidence, Telephone Records, Hearsay, Directions to Jury, Robbery With Wounding, Verdict Reasonableness, Sentencing
Criminal Law Identification Evidence Photographic Identification Com Fit Images Admission of Evidence Telephone Records Hearsay Directions to Jury +3 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vural Can

Applicant/appellant

R (Regina)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (court of Criminal Appeal, Nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether photographic identification evidence was properly admitted
  2. 2 Whether admission of com-fit photo was an error
  3. 3 Relevance and admissibility of telephone records of Mustafa Sasi

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in admitting the photographic identification or com-fit evidence; telephone records/SIM card evidence was relevant and properly admitted; there was no admissible fresh evidence or miscarriage of justice; the verdict was open to the jury based on identification and circumstantial evidence; no misdirection or inadequacy of jury directions; sentence imposed was within discretion and not excessive.

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.