R v Scott Alan May (No 2)

Case

[2008] NSWSC 595

13 May 2008


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
R v Scott Alan May (No 2) [2008] NSWSC 595 [2008] NSWSC 595 13 May 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Scott Alan May, was convicted of various serious offences following a joint criminal enterprise. The primary focus of this appeal is the admissibility of a statement made by the appellant against another participant, Mr. White. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the statement was admissible under section 87(1)(c) of the Evidence Act, which addresses the admissibility of representations made by a participant in a joint criminal enterprise against another participant. The Court also had to consider whether the need for independent evidence of the combination and the relevance of the representation to the common purpose applied broadly or only to the specific common purpose charged.

The appellant argued that the trial judge should not have admitted the statement without independent evidence of the combination and that the representation was not made in furtherance of the common purpose. The appellant contended that the requirement for independent evidence was not confined to the specific common purpose charged but applied to any common purpose relevant to the proceedings. The Court considered the legal framework provided by section 87(1)(c) and whether it necessitated such evidence. The Court also addressed the timing of the request to re-open examination in chief, which was not in response to evidence given in cross-examination but arose during the trial.

The Court held that section 87(1)(c) of the Evidence Act does not require independent evidence of the combination to be established before a representation can be admitted. The Court emphasised that the provision is not limited to the specific common purpose charged but extends to any relevant common purpose. However, the Court found that the appellant's request to re-open examination in chief was not justified under the circumstances, as it did not stem from evidence given in cross-examination. The Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the convictions and sentences imposed by the lower courts.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law

Legal Concepts

  • Admissibility of Evidence

  • Joint Criminal Enterprise

  • Common Purpose

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document

Most Recent Citation
Medich v R [2021] NSWCCA 36

Cases Citing This Decision

8

R v Al Batat (No 9) [2020] NSWSC 1101
Medich v R [2021] NSWCCA 36
Higgins v R [2020] NSWCCA 149
Cases Cited

8

Statutory Material Cited

1

Ahern v The Queen [1988] HCA 39
Ahern v The Queen [1988] HCA 39
Osland v The Queen [1998] HCA 75