R v GARLAND [2005] NSWCCA 188

R v GARLAND [2005] NSWCCA 188

The directions given to the jury, although lacking the terms now contended for, sufficiently covered the requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt and did not result in a miscarriage of justice; no leave under Rule 4 should be granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused; application dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeals' 'jury Directions' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'consciousness of Guilt']
['criminal Law'] ['appeals' 'jury Directions' 'circumstantial Evidence' 'consciousness of Guilt']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in directions to the jury on circumstantial evidence' 'Whether the trial judge erred in directions to the jury concerning consciousness of guilt inferred from evidence of flight']

Ratio Decidendi

The directions given to the jury, although lacking the terms now contended for, sufficiently covered the requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt and did not result in a miscarriage of justice; no leave under Rule 4 should be granted.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused; application dismissed

Orders

  • ['Refuse the Applicant leave under Rule 4 to rely on the grounds of appeal advanced' 'Dismiss the application for leave to appeal']