Rowlands v R [2021] NSWDC 723

Rowlands v R [2021] NSWDC 723

The appeal was allowed because the Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Rowlands used the alleged offensive words, and in any event was not satisfied that the alleged words in their context, volume and usage amounted to offensive language. The Court was also not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that words of arrest were spoken before the alleged resistance or that Mr Rowlands' one-arm action was resistance to arrest rather than a response to being pushed backwards, and accepted that the action satisfied self-defence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Conviction Appeal / Appeal From Local Court Convictions
Outcome
The conviction appeal was upheld, the Local Court convictions and orders were set aside, and Mr Rowlands was found not guilty on both charges.
Legal Topics
['conviction Appeal' 'offensive Language in a Public Place' 'resist or Hinder Police Officer in Execution of Duty' 'police Arrest Powers' 'burden of Proof' 'good Character' 'self Defence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['conviction Appeal' 'offensive Language in a Public Place' 'resist or Hinder Police Officer in Execution of Duty' 'police Arrest Powers' 'burden of Proof' 'good Character' 'self Defence']

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 Conviction Appeal / Appeal From Local Court Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Rowlands used offensive language in a public place.' 'Whether the alleged words, if spoken, met the high threshold for offensive language in the circumstances.' 'Whether Mr Rowlands was under arrest before the conduct alleged to constitute resisting arrest.' "Whether Mr Rowlands' conduct in striking or pushing away Officer Culligan's arm amounted to resisting arrest." "Whether Mr Rowlands' conduct was justified as self-defence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Rowlands used the alleged offensive words, and in any event was not satisfied that the alleged words in their context, volume and usage amounted to offensive language. The Court was also not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that words of arrest were spoken before the alleged resistance or that Mr Rowlands' one-arm action was resistance to arrest rather than a response to being pushed backwards, and accepted that the action satisfied self-defence.

Court Disposition

The conviction appeal was upheld, the Local Court convictions and orders were set aside, and Mr Rowlands was found not guilty on both charges.

Orders

  • ['The conviction appeal is upheld.' 'I set aside the convictions and orders of Magistrate Greenwood made on 9 June 2021.' 'I find the accused not guilty on both charges.' 'I grant liberty to the appellant to make any application in respect of costs by email to my associate within 7 days.']