Legal Research
Cases
Dodds v R

Dodds v R

Case [2009] NSWCCA 78 31 March 2009

Appeal

Admissibility of Evidence

Sentencing

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Reported Decision: 194 A Crim R 408

New South Wales

Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Dodds v R [2009] NSWCCA 78

HEARING DATE(S): 17 December 2008

JUDGMENT DATE:
31 March 2009

JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJatCL at 1; Simpson J at 127; Harrison J at 128

DECISION: 1. Appeal against conviction dismissed
2. Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted but appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - conspire to commit an armed robbery - appeal - evidence - specialised knowledge - Pig Latin evidence - probative value and prejudicial effect - police identities to be kept private - at a time or soon after - sentencing

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Evidence Act 1995
Law Enforcement and National Security (Assumed Identities) Act 1998
Jury Act 1977

CATEGORY: Principal judgment

CASES CITED: De Simoni v R (1981) 147 CLR 383; 35 ALE 265
Kaliyanda v R [2007] NSWCCA 300
Lowe v R (1984) 154 CLR 606; 54 ALR 193
M v R (1994) 18 1 CLR 487
MFA v R (2002) CLR 606
Nguyen v The Queen (2007) 173 A Crim R 557
Nicopoulos v Commissioner for Corrective Services (2004) NSWSC 562
R v Drollett [2005] NSWCCA 356
R v Habib [2005] NSWCCA 223
R v Henry 1999 46 NSWLR 346
R v Shamouil [2006] NSWCCA 112

PARTIES: Dwayne Kevin Dodds (Appellant)
The Crown

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/3061

COUNSEL: J L Ghabrial (Appellant)
G Rowling (Crown)

SOLICITORS: O'Connor Legal (Appellant)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 06/21/1099

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Tupman DCJ

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 15 June 2007

2007/3061

McCLELLAN CJ at CL
SIMPSON J
HARRISON J
TUESDAY 31 MARCH 2009

DODDS, Dwayne Kevin v R

Judgment

1 McCLELLAN CJ at CL: The appellant was tried and convicted of a charge that he conspired to commit an armed robbery between 6 May 2005 and 2 July 2006 with Robert Lee, George Tuifua, Acura Niuqila and other persons. A primary issue at the trial was whether there was the conspiracy as alleged. However, the issue of particular significance in this appeal was whether the Crown had established, to the requisite standard, that the appellant was a party to the alleged conspiracy.

2 The Crown case against the alleged conspirators was primarily comprised of the record of multiple intercepted telephone conversations, DNA from balaclavas and other items and the observations, in particular of police officers, who intercepted the conspirators as they travelled to their target, alleged to be the Commonwealth Bank branch at Seven Hills. The appellant was not identified by the police as being present when the motor vehicles were intercepted but there was other evidence to connect him with the events of that morning.

Relevant facts

3 In the middle of May 2005, the police commenced lawfully intercepting telephone conversations between the alleged conspirators, including the appellant and his co-accused. Over 7000 conversations were intercepted out of which 108 contained conversations which the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Dodds v R

Details

AGLC: Dodds v R [2009] NSWCCA 78
Case: [2009] NSWCCA 78
Decision Date: 31 March 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved Dodds, who was appealing a decision that convicted him of conspiring to commit an armed robbery. The appeal centred on various aspects of the evidence presented, particularly the probative value and prejudicial effect of certain pieces of evidence, as well as issues regarding the anonymity of police officers. The High Court of Australia was the court that heard the appeal.

The central legal issues in the case were whether the evidence of the conspiracy, which included testimony in Pig Latin and references to police officers, was admissible and whether it had sufficient probative value to outweigh any prejudicial effect. Additionally, the court needed to consider whether the requirement to keep the identities of police officers confidential had been breached, and whether the conspiracy occurred at a time or soon after the planning phase.

The court determined that the evidence in Pig Latin, while unusual, was relevant and had probative value in establishing the conspiracy. The court held that the evidence's probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect, and it was therefore admissible. The court also found that there was no breach of the rule requiring the anonymity of police officers, as the evidence did not disclose their identities. Lastly, the court held that the conspiracy occurred at a time or soon after the planning phase, and thus the timing did not affect the validity of the conspiracy charge. The appeal was ultimately dismissed.

The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal and affirm the conviction of Dodds for conspiring to commit an armed robbery. The court did not alter the sentence imposed on Dodds, and the conviction remained intact.

Orders