REGINA v Raymond JOHNSON [2002] NSWCCA 492

REGINA v Raymond JOHNSON [2002] NSWCCA 492

On the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of both offences. The circumstances supported the inference that the three occupants of the van were acting in concert, that the racquets had been stolen earlier that evening, and that the appellant was in joint possession of both the stolen racquets and the housebreaking implements. The jury was entitled to reject the appellant's explanation and exclude any reasonable innocent explanation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; application for leave to appeal against severity of sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['stealing' 'possession of Implements of Housebreaking' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'recent Possession' 'joint Possession']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['stealing' 'possession of Implements of Housebreaking' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'recent Possession' 'joint Possession']

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 Severity of Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdicts convicting the appellant of stealing and possession of implements of housebreaking were unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence.' "Whether the evidence was capable of proving beyond reasonable doubt that the racquets were stolen in the hours preceding the appellant's arrest." 'Whether the evidence was capable of proving beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was in joint possession of the stolen racquets and the housebreaking implements.']

Ratio Decidendi

On the whole of the evidence it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of both offences. The circumstances supported the inference that the three occupants of the van were acting in concert, that the racquets had been stolen earlier that evening, and that the appellant was in joint possession of both the stolen racquets and the housebreaking implements. The jury was entitled to reject the appellant's explanation and exclude any reasonable innocent explanation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; application for leave to appeal against severity of sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' 'The application for leave to appeal against severity of sentence is dismissed.']