Category Archives: !! Part 3.09

R v Himbert [2015] ACTSC 6 (2 February 2015)

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/act/ACTSC/2015/6.html

CRIMINAL LAW – Particular Offences – drug offences – offence of trafficking in a controlled drug other than cannabis – judge alone trial – offence proved.
JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Jurisdiction – whether case should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction – whether requisite geographical nexus exists.
EVIDENCE – Judicial Discretion to Admit or Exclude Evidence – whether standard for admission of voice identification evidence is the same as visual identification evidence under s 135 of the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) – held voice identification evidence is held to the general provisions of admissibility under the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) – held that evidence not excluded by s 135 Evidence Act 2011 (ACT)

Peterson (a Pseudonym) v The Queen [2014] VSCA 111 (6 June 2014)

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSCA/2014/111.html

CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Interlocutory appeal – Review of the trial judge’s refusal to certify with respect to interlocutory decision – Identification evidence – Applicant arraigned and pleaded not guilty to an indictment containing a charge of intentionally causing serious injury – Complainant identified the applicant from a photograph on Facebook – Whether probative value of identification evidence outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice – Trial judge refused to exclude the identification evidence – Application was made for certification – Certification refused – Application to review certification decision refused – Interlocutory decision plainly correct – Whether reasons for granting leave ‘clearly outweigh any disruption to trial’ – Application for review – Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) ss 295 (2)–(3), 296, 297 (2).

Walford v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2012] NSWCA 290 (17 September 2012)

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2012/290.html

EVIDENCE – visual identification evidence – meaning of s 114 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – what was the relevant act of identification – what was the act of identification to which the question objected to was addressed – does the section refer to out of court visual identification as well as in court visual identification – whether reasonable to have held an identification parade – correct interpretation and application of s 114.

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 113, 114; Pt 3.9

Walford v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2012] NSWCA 290 [2012] NSWCA 291 (17 September 2012)

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2012/291.html

EVIDENCE – visual identification evidence – meaning of s 114 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – what was the relevant act of identification – what was the act of identification to which the question objected to was addressed – does the section refer to out of court visual identification as well as in court visual identification – whether reasonable to have held an identification parade – correct interpretation and application of s 114.