Tuncbilek v R [2012] NSWCCA 224

Tuncbilek v R [2012] NSWCCA 224

Leave was granted but the appeal was dismissed because the trial Judge's directions on circumstantial evidence and coincidence evidence correctly stated the law, there was no error arising from the Crown's failure to lead biometric height evidence, the differences concerning the handgun and face covering were matters properly addressed at trial and did not undermine the Crown case, and the circumstantial evidence as a whole strongly supported the conclusion that the appellant was involved in the Lake Haven armed robbery. The verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction; Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination of Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Time extended, leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['armed Robbery' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'biometric Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['armed Robbery' 'appeal Against Conviction' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdict' 'jury Directions' 'biometric 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction; Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination of Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial Judge failed to give proper directions to the jury about circumstantial evidence and the use of coincidence evidence.' "Whether it was inappropriate for the Crown not to lead evidence of biometric measurement of the appellant's height." 'Whether differences between the replica revolver and ski mask found on 21 August 2009 and items described in earlier robberies undermined the conviction.' 'Whether the conviction for the armed robbery at Lake Haven was unreasonable or could not be supported having regard to all the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted but the appeal was dismissed because the trial Judge's directions on circumstantial evidence and coincidence evidence correctly stated the law, there was no error arising from the Crown's failure to lead biometric height evidence, the differences concerning the handgun and face covering were matters properly addressed at trial and did not undermine the Crown case, and the circumstantial evidence as a whole strongly supported the conclusion that the appellant was involved in the Lake Haven armed robbery. The verdict was not unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

Court Disposition

Time extended, leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Extend time for the filing of an application for leave to appeal to 23 March 2012.' 'Grant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.']