R v Puckeridge [2000] NSWCCA 193

R v Puckeridge [2000] NSWCCA 193

The trial judge did not err in directing the jury on causation, onus or standard of proof, nor in summarising the defence expert's evidence; the charge left causation and reasonable possibilities for the jury to determine and placed the burden on the Crown throughout.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction (and Sentence, Not Pressed at Hearing) After Jury Trial in Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['murder' 'causation' 'jury Directions' 'onus and Standard of Proof']
['criminal Law'] ['murder' 'causation' 'jury Directions' 'onus and Standard of Proof']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction (and Sentence, Not Pressed at Hearing) After Jury Trial in Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in directions on cause of death' "Whether the trial judge failed to adequately direct the jury in relation to the appellant's case" 'Whether the trial judge erred in directions on the onus and standard of proof']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in directing the jury on causation, onus or standard of proof, nor in summarising the defence expert's evidence; the charge left causation and reasonable possibilities for the jury to determine and placed the burden on the Crown throughout.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed' 'Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed']