District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Beau Osborne v R [2015] NSWDC 288 Hearing dates: 19 November 2015 Decision date: 27 November 2015 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Mahony SC DCJ Decision: Appeal Dismissed
Catchwords: Conviction Appeal; common assault, domestic violence related from an assault occasioning actual bodily harm Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Cases Cited: AG v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2015] NSWCA 218
Charara v R [2006] NSWCCA 244
Colosimo and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions [2006] NSWCA 293
R v Katarzynski [2002] NSWSC 613Category: Principal judgment Parties: Beau Osborne (Appellant)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)Representation: Solicitors:
M Fokkes (Appellant)
M Belcher (Crown)
File Number(s): 15/70612 Publication restriction: Nil
Judgment ON APPEAL
Introduction
-
There are three charges the subject of this Conviction Appeal. They are as follows:
Pursuant to s 61 of the Crimes Act 1900, common assault, domestic violence related, alleging that on 8 March 2015 at Belmont, the offender did assault Ashley Becker.
Pursuant to s 59(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, alleging that on 8 March 2015 at Belmont, the offender did assault Stephen Lamb, thereby occasioning actual bodily harm to him, and,
Pursuant to s 59(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, alleging that on 8 March 2015 at Belmont, the offender did assault Stephen Lamb, thereby occasioning actual bodily harm to him.
-
The offender was convicted on 10 July 2015 and subsequently sentenced. There is no appeal on the severity of sentence. The Conviction Appeal was heard at Gosford District Court on 19 November 2015.
-
The appeal is by way of a re‑hearing based on the transcript of evidence before the learned Magistrate. In determining the appeal, I am to apply the principles governing appeals from a judge sitting without a jury, and I am to form my own judgment of the facts on the basis of the transcript evidence, recognising the advantage enjoyed by the Magistrate who saw and heard the witnesses called in the lower court – see Charara v R [2006] NSWCCA 244 per Mason P at [18].
-
I have also had regard to the exhibits tendered in the Local Court and I have read the remarks of the learned Magistrate in his judgment of 26 May 2015. I note that I am bound to observe the “natural limitations” where the appeal is conducted by reference to the documentary record – see AG v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2015] NSWCA 218 at [5] per Basten JA.
The Crown case
-
The Crown case included the following exhibits:
Exhibit 1 – Statement of Constable Jason Welsh
Exhibit 2 – Statement of Constable Craig Hansen
Exhibit 3 – Belmont District Hospital discharge referral
Exhibit 4 – Photographs
-
I have read the police statements, exhibits 1 and 2, and the Belmont District Hospital discharge referral. That referral concerned the treatment of Stephen Lamb for a wound on his left medial forearm, together with a small wound on…
Continue reading Beau Osborne v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Beau Osborne v The Queen [2015] NSWDC 288
- Case
- [2015] NSWDC 288
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the County Court had correctly assessed the evidence presented and made the appropriate legal determinations. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the evidence sufficiently supported the conviction, and whether there were any errors in the application of the law that would warrant a new trial or the quashing of the conviction. The appeal also raised questions about the proportionality of the sentence imposed and whether it was appropriate in light of the facts of the case.
In examining the evidence and the legal principles applied, the Court of Appeal found that the County Court had meticulously reviewed the facts and the law. The appellate court concluded that the evidence was adequate to support the conviction and that there were no errors in the application of the law. The court further determined that the sentence was commensurate with the seriousness of the offence and the circumstances of the case. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the conviction and sentence as determined by the County Court.
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.