Legal Research
Cases
Massaquoi v The King

Massaquoi v The King

Case [2024] NSWCCA 125 17 July 2024

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Massaquoi v R [2024] NSWCCA 125
Hearing dates: 17 June 2024
Date of orders: 17 July 2024
Decision date: 17 July 2024
Before: Mitchelmore JA at [1];
Garling J at [2];
Wilson J at [3]
Decision:
(1) Refuse an extension of time in which to bring an application for leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon the applicant on 15 March 2021.

Catchwords:
CRIME – appeal against sentence – s 66EA offence – jury trial – fact finding after trial – obligation to find facts consistent with the verdict of the jury – where sentencing judge accepted the evidence of the complainant as reliable – no basis advanced by applicant before sentencing judge to distinguish aspects of the complainant’s evidence – sentence imposed on the basis that whole of complainant’s evidence accepted – application raising a point not made at first instance – delay in bringing application significant and not fully explained – extension of time refused

Legislation Cited:
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61J, 61DE, 66DB, 66EA, 578A
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
Criminal Appeal Rules 1952 (NSW)
Criminal Legislation Amendment (Child Sexual Abuse) Act 2018 (NSW)
Criminal Procedure Act 1999 (NSW), s 150
Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), r 3.1

Cases Cited:
Burr v R [2020] NSWCCA 282
Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67
Chiro v The Queen (2017) 260 CLR 425; [2017] HCA 37
Edwards v R [2009] NSWCCA 1999
GAS v The Queen (2004) 217 CLR 198; [2004] HCA 22
KMC v Director of Public Prosecutions (SA) (2020) 94 ALJR 415; [2020] HCA 6
MK v R; RB v R [2023] NSWCCA 180
R v M, DV [2019] SASCFC 59
RB v R [2022] NSWCCA 142
The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54
Xerri v The King [2024] HCA 5
Zreika v R [2012] NSWCCA 12

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Sandy Massaquoi (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
B Neild SC (Applicant)
B Hatfield SC (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (Applicant)
Solicitor for the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2019/00071668
Publication restriction: Statutory non-publication order applies in relation to the complainant.
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of New South Wales

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

15 March 2021

Before:

J Smith SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2019/71668

JUDGMENT

MITCHELMORE JA: I agree with Wilson J.
GARLING J: I agree with Wilson J.
WILSON J: The applicant, Sandy Massaquoi, stood trial before the District Court from 7 September 2020 to 25 September 2020 upon an indictment that charged him with maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child, contrary to s 66EA of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), together with several other charges brought in the alternative to the principal offence. The jury returned a verdict of guilty to the s 66EA offence, a…

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 Massaquoi v The King

Details

AGLC: Massaquoi v The King [2024] NSWCCA 125
Case: [2024] NSWCCA 125
Decision Date: 17 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Massaquoi, appealed against his sentence imposed following a conviction for a s 66EA offence, which related to a sexual assault. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia, which had appellate jurisdiction in this instance. The court was tasked with determining whether the sentencing judge had erred in accepting the entirety of the complainant's evidence without applying any scrutiny or discount. The applicant argued that the sentencing judge had failed to properly consider the reliability of the complainant's evidence and had not applied an appropriate discount to the testimony.

The legal issues before the court involved the principles of sentencing and the role of the sentencing judge in assessing the credibility and reliability of the evidence presented, particularly in cases where a jury had already determined the guilt of the accused. The court examined whether the sentencing judge had an obligation to independently assess the facts and whether there was any error in the judge's acceptance of the complainant's evidence without any discount. The court also considered the procedural fairness and the timeliness of the application, given that it was brought several months after the original sentencing hearing.

The High Court found that while there was no inherent error in the sentencing judge accepting the complainant's evidence, the applicant had not raised the issue of the reliability of the evidence before the sentencing judge. The court emphasised the importance of procedural fairness and the timeliness of applications for judicial review. The court held that the delay in bringing the application and the lack of explanation for this delay meant that the application was not well-founded. Consequently, the court refused to extend the time for the application and dismissed the appeal against sentence.

Orders