Police v McNamara

Case [2022] VMC 11

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

This content is currently unavailable.

Details

CaseChat Overview and Summary

AI summary not yet generated for this case.

Orders

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Full text does not contain this section.

Actions

Citations

Police v McNamara [2022] VMC 11

Cases Citing This Decision

Cases Cited

Statutory Material Cited

Hrysikos v Mansfield [2002] VSCA 175
Citation 1 (Para 1)

…ample of breath, the officer must have reasonable grounds for the belief that the person has offended against s 49(1)(b).[2] [2] Hrysikos v Mansfield (2002) 5 VR 485.…
DPP v Serbest [2012] VSC 35
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…ears) is not relevant to the offence with which he was charged.[16] His state of mind is only relevant to penalty not the refusal. [16] DPP v Serbest [2012] VSC 35.…
Sanzaro v County Court of Victoria [2004] VSC 444
Citation 3 (Para 1)

…ce that police members utilise to advise suspected drink drivers regarding the potential consequences of refusing to accompany police. [15] DPP v VAA [2004] VSC 444.…
Sanzaro v County Court of Victoria [2004] VSC 48
Citation 4

…[9][2004] VSC 48.…
DPP v Skinner [2004] VSC 32
Citation 5 (Para 1)

…a conscious appraisal of the situation and information available so as to satisfy themselves there is a basis for making a request. [3] DPP v Skinner [2004] VSC 32.…
DPP v Mitchell [2002] VSC 326
Citation 6 (Para 1)

…or the belief must be the subject of express evidence by the informant[4] or may be inferred from the totality of the evidence.[5] [4] DPP v Mitchell [2002] VSC 326. [5] Iskov v Matters (1977) VR 220, [223]; Public Prosecutions v Boer [1992] VicSC 245.…

AI Chat coming soon