Geraghty v R

The appellant, Geraghty, appealed against his conviction and sentence, contending that the trial judge had erred in admitting tendency evidence and that the non-parole period of his life sentence was manifestly excessive. The appeal was heard by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal. The primary legal issues were whether the trial judge had erred in admitting tendency evidence, specifically intercepted discussions between alleged conspirators, and whether the non-parole period of the appellant’s sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court considered the admissibility of the tendency evidence under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). The intercepted discussion, which mentioned hashish, was redacted to avoid suggesting the appellant's involvement in an earlier importation. The court held that the danger of unfair prejudice did not outweigh the probative value of the evidence. Regarding the sentence, the court assessed the probative value of prior drug importation convictions against the prejudicial effect. The court determined that the probative value substantially outweighed the prejudicial effect, particularly given the significant gap in offending explained by incarceration. The court also took into account the appellant’s age and ill-health, concluding that he was likely to die in prison.

The appeal against the conviction was dismissed, and the appeal against the sentence was upheld to the extent that the non-parole period was reduced to twelve years. The appellant’s life sentence remained unchanged.