CORNWELL v REGINA REGINA v CORNWELL [2006] NSWCCA 116

CORNWELL v REGINA REGINA v CORNWELL [2006] NSWCCA 116

Admitting significant portions of the appellant's earlier evidence (protected by a s 128 certificate) at his retrial was contrary to s 128(7) of the Evidence Act 1995. This evidence included admissions of serious criminal activity, likely having significant prejudicial effect. The appellate court held that this admission caused the trial to miscarry, as the appellant was denied the protection of the certificate and was prejudiced in conducting his defence, warranting the setting aside of the conviction and ordering a new trial.

Parties
Appellant: Richard Bruce Cornwell; Respondent: Commonwealth Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal; Judgment on Appeals Following Retrial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; new trial ordered; Crown appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Import Cocaine, Application of S 128 Certificate (evidence Act 1995), Admissibility of Prior Admissions in Retrial, Failure to Sum Up Defence Case, Unreasonable Verdict, Proviso, Miscarriage of Justice
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Import Cocaine Application of S 128 Certificate (evidence Act 1995) Admissibility of Prior Admissions in Retrial Failure to Sum Up Defence Case Unreasonable Verdict Proviso Miscarriage of Justice

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Bruce Cornwell

Appellant

Commonwealth Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal; Judgment on Appeals Following Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred by admitting evidence subject to a s 128 certificate (Evidence Act 1995) at a retrial
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in summing up the defence case
  3. 3 Whether the verdict was unreasonable and unsupported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Admitting significant portions of the appellant's earlier evidence (protected by a s 128 certificate) at his retrial was contrary to s 128(7) of the Evidence Act 1995. This evidence included admissions of serious criminal activity, likely having significant prejudicial effect. The appellate court held that this admission caused the trial to miscarry, as the appellant was denied the protection of the certificate and was prejudiced in conducting his defence, warranting the setting aside of the conviction and ordering a new trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; new trial ordered; Crown appeal dismissed

Orders

  • 1. The appeal of the appellant is upheld and a new trial ordered.
  • 2. The Crown appeal is dismissed.