CALDERWOOD v R [2007] NSWCCA 180

CALDERWOOD v R [2007] NSWCCA 180

The appeal against conviction failed because the trial judge correctly directed the jury that importation could continue after arrival of the goods in Australia and that guilt depended on proof that the appellant had the required knowledge while still trying to obtain the parcel. The circumstantial evidence, including false names and documents, arrangements with the freight forwarder, repeated attempts to locate the package, telephone calls with Henry Chin, and discussion of x-ray machines and carbon paper, made it open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was knowingly involved in importing MDMA. The edited record of interview was coherent, probative and not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted but appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['importation of Mdma' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'knowledge or Awareness of Real or Significant Likelihood of Narcotics' 'edited Record of Interview' 'telephone Intercepts' 'jury Directions' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'sentencing'] ['importation of Mdma' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'knowledge or Awareness of Real or Significant Likelihood of Narcotics' 'edited Record of Interview' 'telephone Intercepts' 'jury Directions' 'manifest Excess']

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 and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved the elements of the offence under s 233B(1)(b) of the Customs Act 1901, including the fault element.' 'Whether the appellant could be guilty if knowledge of drugs was acquired after the goods arrived in Australia but while efforts to obtain them continued.' 'Whether the verdict was unsafe or unsatisfactory on the circumstantial evidence.' 'Whether the edited record of interview should have been excluded because references to another alleged importation were removed.' 'Whether telephone intercept evidence after 8 April 2004 was relevant and admissible.' "Whether the appellant's absence from pre-trial discussions, if it occurred, caused a miscarriage of justice." 'Whether evidentiary rulings made after the trial commenced caused error.' "Whether the Crown address, trial judge's summing up, and answer to a jury question were distorted or prejudicial." 'Whether the sentence of 6 years and 5 months with a non-parole period of 4 years was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction failed because the trial judge correctly directed the jury that importation could continue after arrival of the goods in Australia and that guilt depended on proof that the appellant had the required knowledge while still trying to obtain the parcel. The circumstantial evidence, including false names and documents, arrangements with the freight forwarder, repeated attempts to locate the package, telephone calls with Henry Chin, and discussion of x-ray machines and carbon paper, made it open to the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was knowingly involved in importing MDMA. The edited record of interview was coherent, probative and not...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted but appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed.' 'Leave to appeal against sentence granted but the appeal dismissed.']