NSW Police v Bowden [2022] NSWLC 6

NSW Police v Bowden [2022] NSWLC 6

Sequence 1 not proved because the accused's actions did not substantially hinder the officer; fleeting grabbing did not meet the threshold for 'substantial' hindrance. Sequence 2 proved as the accused maintained intentional control over the gel blaster pistol found near her residence, thus possessed it without authorisation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial/judgment
Outcome
Sequence 1 dismissed—verdict: not guilty; Sequence 2 proved—verdict: guilty
Legal Topics
['hindering Police' 'possession of Firearm' 'law Enforcement (powers and Responsibilities) Act' 'firearms Offences']

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 / Trial/judgment

  1. 1 ['Whether accused hindered police officer in execution of duty contrary to s 546C Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)' 'Whether accused possessed a prohibited pistol contrary to s 7(1) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)' 'Whether evidence was obtained in contravention of s 10 Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

Sequence 1 not proved because the accused's actions did not substantially hinder the officer; fleeting grabbing did not meet the threshold for 'substantial' hindrance. Sequence 2 proved as the accused maintained intentional control over the gel blaster pistol found near her residence, thus possessed it without authorisation.

Court Disposition

Sequence 1 dismissed—verdict: not guilty; Sequence 2 proved—verdict: guilty

Orders

  • ['Charge under s 546C Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) dismissed' 'Verdict of guilty for possession of prohibited pistol under s 7(1) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)']