RE v R [2024] NSWCCA 180

RE v R [2024] NSWCCA 180

A miscarriage of justice was occasioned by the Crown Prosecutor's submissions based on material not in evidence and by failures of defence counsel, particularly regarding the timing discrepancy between Instagram messages and phone records. The verdict on count 2 was unreasonable, as objective evidence created a reasonable doubt not explained by complainant's manner of giving evidence, while doubt on count 1 could be resolved by the jury's advantage.

Parties
Appellant: RE; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; acquittal entered for count 2; new trial ordered on count 1.
Legal Topics
Appeals Against Conviction, Miscarriage of Justice, Closing Address, Evidentiary Inconsistencies, Sexsomnia Defence, Unreasonable Verdict
Criminal Law Appeals Against Conviction Miscarriage of Justice Closing Address Evidentiary Inconsistencies Sexsomnia Defence Unreasonable Verdict

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RE

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Conviction / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Crown Prosecutor's closing address occasioned a miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether defence counsel's conduct occasioned a miscarriage of justice
  3. 3 Whether new evidence regarding timing synchronisation was relevant and fresh

Ratio Decidendi

A miscarriage of justice was occasioned by the Crown Prosecutor's submissions based on material not in evidence and by failures of defence counsel, particularly regarding the timing discrepancy between Instagram messages and phone records. The verdict on count 2 was unreasonable, as objective evidence created a reasonable doubt not explained by complainant's manner of giving evidence, while doubt on count 1 could be resolved by the jury's advantage.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; acquittal entered for count 2; new trial ordered on count 1.

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal to the extent necessary on grounds 1 and 4.
  • Allow the appeal.