Evans v R [2023] NSWCCA 11
The trial judge was not obliged to direct the jury on the alternative verdict of manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act, as there was no evidence on which the jury, acting reasonably, could find manslaughter and not murder. Evidence of intoxication was speculative and insufficient; furthermore, any intoxication would not have affected intent as the applicant resolved to commit the offence before becoming intoxicated.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 February 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal and Determination
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['murder' 'manslaughter' 'intoxication' 'coincidence Evidence' 'jury Directions' 'unlawful and Dangerous Act']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal and Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred by not leaving manslaughter as an alternative verdict to the jury' 'Whether evidence of intoxication by drugs was sufficient to raise doubt about the intent required for murder']
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge was not obliged to direct the jury on the alternative verdict of manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act, as there was no evidence on which the jury, acting reasonably, could find manslaughter and not murder. Evidence of intoxication was speculative and insufficient; furthermore, any intoxication would not have affected intent as the applicant resolved to commit the offence before becoming intoxicated.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Extend the time for leave to appeal' 'Grant leave to appeal' 'Dismiss the appeal']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment