31 Aug 1995
The appeal was dismissed because the trial judge properly admitted and could legitimately rely on the applicant's cautioned statements, the identification discrepancy was satisfactorily explained and the judge properly rejected the alibi after observing the witness, leaving no basis for appellate intervention.
27 Jun 1995
Leave to appeal against both conviction and sentence was refused because the court found the evidence (co-conspirator testimony and confession statements) sufficient to support conviction and the sentencing judge's assessment of culpability and the total sentence was justified and not manifestly excessive.
27 Apr 1995
Leave to appeal was refused because the grounds were without substance; the convictions were supported by ample evidence (confessions and accomplice evidence) and there was no irregularity, misdirection or misreception of evidence sufficient to vitiate the jury's unanimous verdicts.
3 Feb 1995
Because the trial judge relied on equivocal and hostile witness evidence and that erroneous assessment could have affected his evaluation of the confession statements, the conviction could not be regarded as safe or satisfactory and could not be saved by the proviso; therefore the appeal must be allowed, the conviction quashed and the sentence set aside.
31 May 1993
Convictions on counts 4,5,6 and 7 were safe because the identification evidence, when not wholly positive, could be taken cumulatively with the confession (exhibit P15); however, life imprisonment was unjustified on the facts because the judge lacked sufficient material to satisfy the O'Dwyer criteria and failed to follow Morgan practice, so the life sentences on counts 4 and 6 were substituted with concurrent 18-year terms.
23 Apr 1986
The judge's directions, taken as a whole, were adequate; the trial judge properly exercised his discretion on joint trial and handling of confession evidence; alleged inaccuracies in the summing-up were immaterial and did not render convictions unsafe, therefore applications for leave to appeal against conviction were dismissed.
1 Feb 1980
Although the learned magistrate omitted to call the officer who conducted the identification parade and did not expressly apply the Turnbull directions, the properly admitted confession statements and the totality of the evidence provided sufficient basis for the magistrate to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty; therefore the appeal is dismissed.