Lacco v The State of Western Australia

The appellant, Lacco, was convicted of aggravated burglary by a jury in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The case was heard on appeal in the Court of Appeal of that state. The dispute centred around the consistency of the jury's verdict, particularly in light of the appellant's acquittal on robbery charges and the acquittal of a co-accused. The appellant argued that the jury's verdict was inconsistent with these acquittals and that the trial judge's direction to the jury was inadequate.

The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the term "in company" within the context of the crime of aggravated burglary and whether the direction given to the jury was sufficient to allow them to make a proper decision. The court had to determine if the verdict was consistent with the other findings and if the jury had been properly guided in their deliberations.

The Court of Appeal held that the jury's verdict was indeed inconsistent with the acquittals and that the direction given to the jury did not adequately address the specific circumstances of the case. The court found that the trial judge's direction did not sufficiently guide the jury on the elements of the offence of aggravated burglary and how it related to the other charges. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in part, leading to a re-evaluation of the conviction.