Legal Research
Cases
R v Johns

R v Johns

Case [1999] NSWCCA 206 2 August 1999

Appeal

Admissibility of Evidence

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Reported Decision:
110 A Crim R 149

New South Wales

Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: REGINA v. JOHNS [1999] NSWCCA 206

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60481 of 1998

HEARING DATE(S): Monday 17 May 1999

JUDGMENT DATE:
2 August 1999

PARTIES :

REGINA v.
JOHNS, Terrence Stanley

JUDGMENT OF: Dunford J at 1; Greg James J at 2; Smart AJ at 68

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 67/76

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: O'Brien, J.

COUNSEL: Crown: L.M.B. Lamprati
App: P. Byrne, SC.

SOLICITORS: Crown: C.K. Smith
App: James A. Hall

CATCHWORDS: Attorney-General's reference - further appeal - nature of, leave not necessary - appeal for error of fact or law below - admissions - discretion to reject - relevance of conduct of trial - former law and practice - discretion to reject does not relate to dispute as to making - allegation of police conspiracy - proper directions - general evidence of police corruption - evidence of dishonesty of individual - fresh evidence - materiality and cogency - relevance of remoteness as affecting probative value - insufficiency of evidence - unadopted admissions - advantages of jury.

ACTS CITED: Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Evidence Act 1995

CASES CITED:
Johns (1978) 1 NSWLR 282
Johns (1978) 2 NSWLR 259
Johns (1979-80) 143 CLR 108
Gunn (No. 1) (1942) SR (NSW) 23
Gunn (No. 2) (1943) SR (NSW) 27
Mickelberg (1989) 167 CLR 259
Davies (1937) 57 CLR 170
Burns (1975) 49 ALJR 248
Ragen (1964) 81 WN (NSW) 572
Driscoll (1977) 51 ALJR 731
Lee (1950) 82 CLR 133
Foster (1993) 113 ALR 1
K. (1984-85) 14 A. Crim. R. 226
Kurtic (1996) 85 A. Crim. R. 57
Victorian Stevedoring & General Contracting Co. Pty. Limited v. Dignan (1931) 46 CLR 73
Towner (1991) 56 A. Crim. R. 221
McKinney & Judge (1991) 171 CLR 468
Ross (1922) 30 CLR 246
McKay (1935) 54 CLR 1
Carr (1988) 165 CLR 314
Duke (1988-89) 180 CLR 508
Gallagher (1985) 160 CLR 392
Zaidi (1991) 57 A. Crim. R. 189
Beattie (1996) 40 NSWLR 155
Miller (CCA, unreported 3 May 1996)
Marsala (CCA, unreported 31 May 1996)
Selewski & Ors (CCA, unreported 19 June 1996)
McLaren (CCA, unreported 22 October 1996)
Baartman (CCA, unreported 6 May 1997)
Thomas [1999] NSWCCA 68
Vastag (CCA, unreported 12 May 1997)
Hastings (CCA, unreported 29 September 1997)
Chad (CCA, unreported 13 May 1997)
Robinson [1999] NSWCCA 186
Smith (1979) 2 NSWLR 304
Thompson [1893] 2 QB 12
Chidiac & Asfour (1990-91) 171 CLR 432
M. (1994) 181 CLR 487
Histollo v. National Parks & Wildlife Service (CCA, unreported 10 December 1998)
Giam [1999] NSWCCA 53

DECISION: Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL
No. 60481 of 1998 CORAM: DUNFORD, J.
GREG JAMES, J.
SMART, AJ.
MONDAY 2 AUGUST 1999

REGINA v. TERRENCE STANLEY JOHNS
JUDGMENT

1 DUNFORD, J: In this case I have had the opportunity of reading the judgment of Greg James, J. in draft form. I agree that the…

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 R v Johns

Details

AGLC: R v Johns [1999] NSWCCA 206
Case: [1999] NSWCCA 206
Decision Date: 2 August 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Johns, the defendant was convicted of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and was subsequently sentenced. The case proceeded to a further appeal by the Attorney-General, who sought clarification and potential alteration of the original decision. The High Court was tasked with determining several legal issues, including whether the trial court had the discretion to reject certain admissions made by the defendant and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to uphold the conviction.

The court examined the nature of the appeal and found that leave was not necessary due to the potential error of fact or law in the lower court's decision. The primary legal issue was whether the trial court had the discretion to reject admissions made by the defendant, and if so, whether this discretion was exercised correctly. The court also considered the relevance of general evidence of police corruption and the specific evidence of dishonesty of individual officers. Furthermore, the court assessed whether the fresh evidence presented was material and cogent, and whether the remoteness of the evidence affected its probative value.

The High Court found that the trial court had indeed exercised its discretion to reject certain admissions made by the defendant, and that this decision was appropriate given the context and nature of the evidence. The court determined that the evidence of police corruption and dishonesty was relevant to the case, and that the fresh evidence presented was both material and cogent. The court also found that the remoteness of the evidence did not negate its probative value. Ultimately, the court concluded that the evidence was sufficient to uphold the conviction, and therefore no error of fact or law had been made by the lower court.

No further orders were made by the court, and the conviction and sentence of the defendant were upheld.

Orders