REGINA v CHEUNG [1999] NSWCCA 421

REGINA v CHEUNG [1999] NSWCCA 421

The sentencing judge did not err by failing to ask the jury for the basis of its verdict or by making his own findings of fact for sentence. Any power to question the jury outside manslaughter cases was doubtful and, if it existed, discretionary and not required in this case. The judge's findings accepted the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Life Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['verdict' 'factual Basis of Verdict' 'enquiry by Judge of Jury' 'discretion' 'worst Type of Case' 'duty of Judge to Find the Facts After Verdict' 'importation of Heroin']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['verdict' 'factual Basis of Verdict' 'enquiry by Judge of Jury' 'discretion' 'worst Type of Case' 'duty of Judge to Find the Facts After Verdict' 'importation of Heroin']

Source-derived case record

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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Life Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge should have asked the jury whether it found the applicant guilty on the Crown's primary case or on the alternative case." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in determining the factual basis for sentence without sentencing on the alternative basis most favourable to the applicant.' 'Whether s 61 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 applied because there had been a wrong decision on a question of law involving a substantial miscarriage of justice.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err by failing to ask the jury for the basis of its verdict or by making his own findings of fact for sentence. Any power to question the jury outside manslaughter cases was doubtful and, if it existed, discretionary and not required in this case. The judge's findings accepted the Crown's primary case, were consistent with the verdict, were made beyond reasonable doubt, and justified the conclusion that the offence fell within the worst category for which life imprisonment was open. There was therefore no wrong decision of law or substantial miscarriage of justice.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']