R v TD [2013] NSWCCA 337

R v TD [2013] NSWCCA 337

The evidence was not unlawfully obtained as the Authority was validly granted, and the conduct of the undercover operative did not cross the line into prohibited inducement or encouragement of criminal activity beyond what the respondent was predisposed to do. Therefore, the recordings are admissible and the District Court's exclusion ruling was erroneous.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal (criminal) / Appeal From Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
['solicit to Murder' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'controlled Operations' 'undercover Police Operations' 'unlawfully Obtained Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['solicit to Murder' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'controlled Operations' 'undercover Police Operations' 'unlawfully Obtained Evidence']

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

Crown Appeal (criminal) / Appeal From Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Authority under the Law Enforcement (Controlled Operations) Act 1997 was validly granted' 'Whether the conduct of undercover operative went beyond authorised activity so as to unlawfully induce or encourage criminal activity' 'Whether the evidence collected was unlawfully or improperly obtained under the Evidence Act 1995 s 138' 'Whether recording/transcripts of conversations between undercover officer and accused should be admitted']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence was not unlawfully obtained as the Authority was validly granted, and the conduct of the undercover operative did not cross the line into prohibited inducement or encouragement of criminal activity beyond what the respondent was predisposed to do. Therefore, the recordings are admissible and the District Court's exclusion ruling was erroneous.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • ["The Director's appeal is upheld." 'The ruling of the District Court that evidence of the conversations between UCO535 and the respondent not be admitted is vacated.']