R v TS [2017] NSWCCA 247

R v TS [2017] NSWCCA 247

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not commit an error of law alone. In a sexual assault prosecution wholly dependent on the complainant's evidence, it was open to consider the no case submission at the close of the complainant's evidence in chief, when the evidence on the count had reached its high point. Later complaint evidence could not improve upon the complainant's evidence of what occurred in the bedroom. The judge did not apply a last act test and gave sufficient reasons; his ruling was based on the incapacity of the respondent's words and acts to prove beyond reasonable doubt the intention and attempt alleged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Crown Appeal Against Directed Acquittal / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal Pursuant to S 107(2) of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['attempted Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'attempted Indecent Assault' 'directed Acquittal' 'no Case Submission' 'crown Appeal on Question of Law Alone']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'appeals'] ['attempted Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'attempted Indecent Assault' 'directed Acquittal' 'no Case Submission' 'crown Appeal on Question of Law Alone']

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 Crown Appeal Against Directed Acquittal / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal Pursuant to S 107(2) of the Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred by directing an acquittal before completion of the Crown case.' 'Whether the trial judge failed to take the Crown case at its highest or erred in concluding the evidence was incapable of supporting a guilty verdict.' 'Whether the trial judge applied an erroneous last act test to the offence of attempt.' 'Whether the trial judge gave sufficient reasons for the directed verdict.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge did not commit an error of law alone. In a sexual assault prosecution wholly dependent on the complainant's evidence, it was open to consider the no case submission at the close of the complainant's evidence in chief, when the evidence on the count had reached its high point. Later complaint evidence could not improve upon the complainant's evidence of what occurred in the bedroom. The judge did not apply a last act test and gave sufficient reasons; his ruling was based on the incapacity of the respondent's words and acts to prove beyond reasonable doubt the intention and attempt alleged.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.']