Aggravated theft; + offences on the Type 1 taken into consideration (driving offences & offence of failure to seem).
Asserted failure by accused to get in touch with witnesses - Instructions to jury - application of Jones v Dunkel theory to case of accused occasioning miscarriage.
Applicant was a passenger in a MV stolen the former day by his co-offender. Police pursued & stopped the vehicle & arrested the two Adult men. Co-offender had accelerated & pushed the MV inside a unsafe way, injuring the police officer standing beside the vehicle.
Admissibility of evidence intending to complainant's conduct & Mind-set to accused - leaving of different verdicts of carnal know-how - right building of ss.61D, 61G & seventy eight Crimes Act - Instructions regarding criticism, delay - unique situation exactly where accused denied acts of indecency or intercourse but admitted consensual intercourse - option circumstance of consent not place - competence of demo counsel - summing up didn't fairly set defence scenario - failure of defence counsel to acquire ruling from judge as as to whether evidence of appellant's prior conviction admissible in function that defence adduced evidence of good character in a certain respect.
Software for extension of your time filed minor fewer than nine several years immediately after sentence - regardless of whether admission of 'romantic relationship'proof constituted miscarriage of justice - sufficiency of proof of penetration - directions on needed psychological elements.
Regardless of whether current Bench from the CCA has jurisdiction to grant the appliance - no matter if, if these types of jurisdiction exists, it should be exercised in favour on the applicant.
Applicant at first pleaded not guilty but altered his plea after the demo decide admitted proof taken by video website link from a Los Angeles travel agent who identified applicant as collecting the tickets for himself, the 2 Females & An additional co-accused (see R v Bigic  NSWCCA 9).
Irrespective of whether head sentence exterior vary appropriate for offence - no matter whether NPP too much in relation to head sentence - irrespective of whether amount of prohibited import a applicable Think about sentencing.
Respondent was arrested throughout a police Procedure which was targeting the person for whom he worked. Respondent, by no fault of his possess, wasn't addressed from the DC for many five many years. He co-operated with law enforcement within the time of his arrest & pleaded responsible within the earliest possibility.
Appellant was married to complainant's sister. Complainant alleged that on just one occasion he grabbed her breast, on One more he attempted to kiss her & was touching her around the breasts & vaginal space. She spoke to one of her lecturers about the incidents. Some months later, the complainant claimed the appellant raped her.
The appellant was arrested on the different offence. The target identified the appellant while the appellant was in custody. The appellant was handcuffed at some time of identification.
Appellant, sporting a baseball cap & sunglasses, entered tiny shop & accosted the operator that has a kitchen knife.
Offences arose away from two special info incidents where respondent accompanied two co-offenders who demanded funds from taxi motorists. In the course of 1st incident, co-offenders generated a knife & a syringe; all through 2nd incident a knife was created.
Sole father or mother in receipt of Social Service cash flow - drug dependancy - worry of caring for her dying mom - tries to improve her education so that you can come across worthwhile employment.