R v AMBROSOLI [2002] NSWCCA 386

R v AMBROSOLI [2002] NSWCCA 386

The statement and committal evidence of Shane Clement Cornish were not admissible under s65(2)(c) as the circumstances of the making did not make it highly probable that the representation was reliable, given the witness's own qualifications and admitted inaccuracies. However, the evidence, by virtue of the committal procedure and its treatment in proceedings, was admissible under s65(3) since the defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness at committal, and the requirements of the Justices Act procedural framework were satisfied. The trial judge did not err in declining to exclude the evidence under s137, as its probative value was not outweighed by unfair prejudice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal – Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['hearsay Evidence' 'admissibility of Prior Statements' 'exception to Hearsay Rule' 'committal Proceedings' 'section 65 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'section 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['hearsay Evidence' 'admissibility of Prior Statements' 'exception to Hearsay Rule' 'committal Proceedings' 'section 65 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'section 137 Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal – Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in admitting into evidence the statement and transcript of evidence at committal of Shane Clement Cornish (Exhibit E) under s65 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether s65(2)(b) or (c), or s65(3) was engaged to allow hearsay evidence' 'Whether the evidence should have been excluded under s137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) for unfair prejudice']

Ratio Decidendi

The statement and committal evidence of Shane Clement Cornish were not admissible under s65(2)(c) as the circumstances of the making did not make it highly probable that the representation was reliable, given the witness's own qualifications and admitted inaccuracies. However, the evidence, by virtue of the committal procedure and its treatment in proceedings, was admissible under s65(3) since the defendant had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness at committal, and the requirements of the Justices Act procedural framework were satisfied. The trial judge did not err in declining to exclude the evidence under s137, as its probative value was not outweighed by unfair prejudice.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal is dismissed.']