Anderson v R [2019] NSWCCA 256
It was open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant intended to cause grievous bodily harm, and the sentences imposed were within the permissible range. The extension of time to appeal was refused as neither the conviction nor sentence appeals had prospects of success, and additional factors favoured refusal.
- Parties
- Applicant: Richard Anderson; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 30 October 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal (criminal) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for extension of time refused.
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Conviction Appeal, Sentence Appeal, Intent to Cause Grievous Bodily Harm, Manifest Excess
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Richard Anderson
Applicant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal (criminal) / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction was unreasonable or could not be supported having regard to the evidence
- 2 Whether the sentence imposed was unreasonable or plainly unjust
- 3 Whether the application for extension of time to appeal should be granted
Ratio Decidendi
It was open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the applicant intended to cause grievous bodily harm, and the sentences imposed were within the permissible range. The extension of time to appeal was refused as neither the conviction nor sentence appeals had prospects of success, and additional factors favoured refusal.
Court Disposition
Application for extension of time refused.
Orders
- Application for an extension of time to appeal refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment