RWC v R [2013] NSWCCA 58

RWC v R [2013] NSWCCA 58

The absence of a Markuleski direction, in the circumstances of this case where the jury acquitted on some counts but convicted on others based primarily on the complainant's evidence, deprived the appellant of a fair trial and created a risk of unfairness that warranted the convictions being quashed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial, Before the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed, convictions on counts 3 and 4 quashed, new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'markuleski Direction' 'delay in Complaint']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'markuleski Direction' 'delay in Complaint']

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 After Trial, Before the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's verdicts in relation to counts 3 and 4 were unreasonable in light of acquittals on counts 1 and 2 under s 6(1) Criminal Appeal Act 1912" "Whether the trial judge erred by failing to give a Markuleski direction indicating the relevance of doubt over one aspect of a complainant's evidence to their credibility generally"]

Ratio Decidendi

The absence of a Markuleski direction, in the circumstances of this case where the jury acquitted on some counts but convicted on others based primarily on the complainant's evidence, deprived the appellant of a fair trial and created a risk of unfairness that warranted the convictions being quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, convictions on counts 3 and 4 quashed, new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal allowed' 'The convictions on counts 3 and 4 are quashed' "Set aside the sentences imposed by O'Connor QC DCJ on 4 November 2011" 'Order a new trial on counts 3 and 4']