R v MAJW [2007] NSWCCA 145

R v MAJW [2007] NSWCCA 145

Counts 9-12 of the indictment sufficiently allege the essential factual ingredients of the relevant offences; accordingly, they disclose offences known to law and their present form does not preclude sentencing the respondent. Any potential defect in the counts would be cured by the guilty verdicts, and, when the period charged straddles statutory amendments, the lower penalty applies if the Crown cannot prove the timing. Amendment post-verdict is not permissible, but the Court need not decide this as the issue does not arise given the main findings.

Parties
Applicant: R; Respondent: MAJW
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Question of Law Referred From District Court Sentencing Post Conviction
Outcome
Questions determined; counts disclose offences known to law; sentencing can proceed; amendment post-verdict does not arise.
Legal Topics
Indictments, Essential Factual Ingredients of Offences, Amendment of Indictment, Sentencing, Sexual Offences Against Children
Criminal Law Indictments Essential Factual Ingredients of Offences Amendment of Indictment Sentencing Sexual Offences Against Children

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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Applicant

MAJW

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Question of Law Referred From District Court Sentencing Post Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether counts 9-12 on the indictment disclose offences known to law
  2. 2 Whether present form of indictment precludes sentencing the respondent in respect of counts 9-12
  3. 3 Whether post-verdict amendment of indictment is permitted under relevant statute

Ratio Decidendi

Counts 9-12 of the indictment sufficiently allege the essential factual ingredients of the relevant offences; accordingly, they disclose offences known to law and their present form does not preclude sentencing the respondent. Any potential defect in the counts would be cured by the guilty verdicts, and, when the period charged straddles statutory amendments, the lower penalty applies if the Crown cannot prove the timing. Amendment post-verdict is not permissible, but the Court need not decide this as the issue does not arise given the main findings.

Court Disposition

Questions determined; counts disclose offences known to law; sentencing can proceed; amendment post-verdict does not arise.

Orders

  • Question 1: Yes
  • Question 2: No