AGNEW -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 188
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2003] WASCA 188 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:44/2001 | 5 JUNE 2003 | |
| Coram: | MURRAY J ANDERSON J WHEELER J | 20/08/03 | |
| 29 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal dismissed | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : AGNEW -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 188 CORAM : MURRAY J
- ANDERSON J
WHEELER J
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Murder by shooting - Directions as to unwilled act - Directions as to accident - Adequacy of directions as to alternative verdicts - Whether verdict of murder unsafe or unsatisfactory
Legislation:
Criminal Code (WA), s 23, s 266
Result:
Appeal dismissed
(Page 2)
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr J A Davies
Respondent : Mr S E Stone
Solicitors:
Appellant : Dawson Davies
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439
M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487
Melbourne v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR…
Continue reading Agnew v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Agnew v The Queen [2003] WASCA 188
- Case
- [2003] WASCA 188
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellant, Agnew, was convicted of the murder of his wife and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed against the conviction, arguing that the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding alternative verdicts were inadequate. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia. The central issue in the appeal was whether the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding alternative verdicts were sufficient and whether the jury should have been directed to consider the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act. The appellant contended that the trial judge failed to properly instruct the jury on the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act, and that the verdict of murder was therefore unsafe or unsatisfactory.
The court considered the adequacy of the trial judge's directions to the jury and whether they were sufficient to allow the jury to consider all possible verdicts. The court held that the trial judge's directions were adequate and that the jury had been properly instructed on the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act. The court found that the jury had been properly directed to consider all possible verdicts, and that the verdict of murder was safe and satisfactory. The court rejected the appellant's argument that the verdict of murder was unsafe or unsatisfactory and dismissed the appeal.
The court found that the trial judge had provided the jury with clear and concise directions regarding the alternative verdicts, and that the jury had been properly instructed on the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act. The court held that the trial judge's directions were sufficient to allow the jury to consider all possible verdicts, and that the verdict of murder was safe and satisfactory. The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction.
The court considered the adequacy of the trial judge's directions to the jury and whether they were sufficient to allow the jury to consider all possible verdicts. The court held that the trial judge's directions were adequate and that the jury had been properly instructed on the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act. The court found that the jury had been properly directed to consider all possible verdicts, and that the verdict of murder was safe and satisfactory. The court rejected the appellant's argument that the verdict of murder was unsafe or unsatisfactory and dismissed the appeal.
The court found that the trial judge had provided the jury with clear and concise directions regarding the alternative verdicts, and that the jury had been properly instructed on the possibility of an accidental shooting or an unwilled act. The court held that the trial judge's directions were sufficient to allow the jury to consider all possible verdicts, and that the verdict of murder was safe and satisfactory. The court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.