RN v R [2024] NSWCCA 20

RN v R [2024] NSWCCA 20

Fairness did not require the trial judge to give a Markuleski direction in the circumstances; the complainant's evidence about the relevant date was consistent; it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt; the verdicts were not unreasonable and no miscarriage of justice resulted.

Parties
Applicant: RN; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Decision
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeals, Sexual Assault, Intimidation, Jury Directions, Unreasonable Verdict
Criminal Law Appeals Sexual Assault Intimidation Jury Directions 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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RN

Applicant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Conviction / Leave to Appeal and Substantive Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to give a Markuleski direction caused miscarriage of justice
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in characterising complainant's evidence as 'consistent'
  3. 3 Whether the verdicts were unreasonable and not supported by the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Fairness did not require the trial judge to give a Markuleski direction in the circumstances; the complainant's evidence about the relevant date was consistent; it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt; the verdicts were not unreasonable and no miscarriage of justice resulted.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is dismissed.