R v Bunevski [2002] NSWCCA 19
In light of R v Rahme, the failure to direct the jury on the limited use of cross-examination based on an excluded record of interview was an error; the Crown conceded the ground was made out, so the conviction was set aside and a new trial ordered.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 February 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. New trial ordered.
- Legal Topics
- ['appeal Against Conviction and Sentence' 'jury Directions' 'excluded Record of Interview' 'limited Use of Evidence for Credibility' 'retrial']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in failing to direct the jury that evidence adduced in cross-examination of the appellant, based upon an excluded record of interview, was not admissible against him and could only be used in respect of credibility.' 'Whether the conviction should be set aside and a new trial ordered.']
Ratio Decidendi
In light of R v Rahme, the failure to direct the jury on the limited use of cross-examination based on an excluded record of interview was an error; the Crown conceded the ground was made out, so the conviction was set aside and a new trial ordered.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. New trial ordered.
Orders
- ['Appeal allowed.' 'Conviction set aside.' 'New trial ordered.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment