Sampson v R [2023] NSWCCA 239

Sampson v R [2023] NSWCCA 239

The coincidence evidence relating to the prior conspiracy was properly admitted as it had significant probative value that substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect; the dissimilarities did not undercut the improbability of coincidence. The verdicts of guilt were open on the circumstantial evidence and were not unreasonable. On sentence, the judge adverted to the effect of cumulation and made an express finding on totality and special circumstances; no error was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted; appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'sentencing' 'evidence Admissibility']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'sentencing' 'evidence Admissibility']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence of a previous conspiracy to commit a similar offence was properly admitted as coincidence evidence under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether dissimilarities undercut the improbability of the events having occurred coincidentally' 'Whether the verdict was unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to advert to the consequence that the applicant would serve more than 75% of the head sentence before being eligible for release on parole']

Ratio Decidendi

The coincidence evidence relating to the prior conspiracy was properly admitted as it had significant probative value that substantially outweighed any prejudicial effect; the dissimilarities did not undercut the improbability of coincidence. The verdicts of guilt were open on the circumstantial evidence and were not unreasonable. On sentence, the judge adverted to the effect of cumulation and made an express finding on totality and special circumstances; no error was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against conviction and sentence granted; appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal against convictions;' 'Dismiss the appeal against convictions;' 'Grant leave to appeal against sentence;' 'Dismiss the appeal against sentence;' 'Suppression and non-publication orders regarding identity of RS and confidential materials, pursuant to Court Suppression and Non-publication...