R. v. Sing [2002] NSWCCA 20

R. v. Sing [2002] NSWCCA 20

The failure by the prosecution to call those who actually carried out the DNA tests deprived the accused of a fair opportunity to test the evidence, creating a significant gap in the prosecution case. Admission of DNA evidence over objection without calling such witnesses was unfairly prejudicial and should have been excluded under Evidence Act ss.135 or 137. The convictions were thus unsafe and must be quashed.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Shane Richard Sing
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered
Legal Topics
DNA Evidence, Hearsay, Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Prosecutor's Duties, Prejudicial Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence DNA Evidence Hearsay Admissibility of Expert Evidence Prosecutor's Duties Prejudicial Evidence

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Shane Richard Sing

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether DNA evidence from experts who did not themselves conduct the relevant tests was admissible
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution had a duty to call the persons who actually conducted the DNA testing
  3. 3 Whether the inclusion of such evidence constituted unfair prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The failure by the prosecution to call those who actually carried out the DNA tests deprived the accused of a fair opportunity to test the evidence, creating a significant gap in the prosecution case. Admission of DNA evidence over objection without calling such witnesses was unfairly prejudicial and should have been excluded under Evidence Act ss.135 or 137. The convictions were thus unsafe and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • New trial ordered