SC v R [2019] NSWCCA 25

SC v R [2019] NSWCCA 25

The jury's verdicts convicting the applicant on counts 6, 7, and 8 and acquitting on others were logically and reasonably based on differences in supporting evidence and were not inconsistent; the trial judge's direction mitigated any possible prejudice from references to a pistol; the sentencing judge correctly assessed the objective seriousness of the offending and did not err or impose a manifestly excessive sentence.

Parties
Applicant: SC; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted. Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Appeal Against Sentence, Inconsistent Verdicts, Murray Direction, Sentencing in Domestic Violence, Verdicts Based on Evidence, Jury Directions, Manifest Excess, Objective Seriousness of Offence
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Appeal Against Sentence Inconsistent Verdicts Murray Direction Sentencing in Domestic Violence Verdicts Based on Evidence Jury Directions +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SC

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury verdicts were inconsistent and unable to be reconciled logically
  2. 2 Whether prejudice from references to a 'pistol' required jury discharge or could be cured by direction
  3. 3 Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing gravity of the offending and imposed a manifestly excessive sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The jury's verdicts convicting the applicant on counts 6, 7, and 8 and acquitting on others were logically and reasonably based on differences in supporting evidence and were not inconsistent; the trial judge's direction mitigated any possible prejudice from references to a pistol; the sentencing judge correctly assessed the objective seriousness of the offending and did not err or impose a manifestly excessive sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted. Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal against conviction and sentence.
  • Dismiss the appeal.