R v CJP; R v CAD; R v MES

[2003] NSWCCA 363

CITATION:	R v CJP; R v CAD; R v MES [2003] NSWCCA 363
HEARING DATE(S):
JUDGMENT DATE:	10 December 2003
JUDGMENT OF:	Sheller JA at 1; Hidden J at 1; Carruthers AJ at 1
DECISION:	Par 3(e) of R v CJP; R v CAD; R MES [2003] NSWCCA 187 amended
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW - Court of Criminal Appeal - amendment of error in recitation of charge in original judgment by application of slip rule
PARTIES :	Regina (appellant) CJP (respondent) CAD (respondent) MES (respondent)
FILE NUMBER(S):	CCA 60030/03; 60031/03; 60032/03
COUNSEL:
SOLICITORS:

LOWER COURTJURISDICTION:	District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):	02/21/3265; 01/21/3324; 01/21/3318
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :	Moore AJ

60030/03
60031/03
60032/03

SHELLER JA
HIDDEN J
CARRUTHERS AJ

Wednesday, 10 December, 2003

REGINA v CJP

REGINA v CAD

REGINA v MES

Judgment

1 THE COURT: Since delivering judgment in this matter on 21 July 2003, it has been brought to our attention that there is an error in our recitation of one of the charges against the respondent, CJP. The charge set out at par 3(e) of the judgment should relate to the complainant GS, rather than ELP. It is appropriate that the judgment be amended by the application of the slip rule.

2 Accordingly, paragraph 3 (e) is now as follows:

(e) that between 14 November and 15 November 2000 at Macquarie Fields he did have sexual intercourse with GS without his consent and knowing that he was not consenting to the sexual intercourse, in circumstances of aggravation, to wit, that at the time of the offence the said GS was a person aged under the age of sixteen years, being in fact aged thirteen years of age; in each case contrary to the provisions of s61J of the Act. The maximum penalty for each at the time of its commission was imprisonment for twenty years.

**********

Last Modified: 12/11/2003