R v Stacker; R v Campbell - [2016] ACTSC 334

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:	R v Stacker; R v Campbell
Citation:	[2016] ACTSC 334
Hearing Dates:	14 and 15 November 2016
DecisionDate:	17 November 2016
Before:	Elkaim J
Decision:	(i) In relation to Count 1, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of aggravated robbery. (ii) In relation to Count 2, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of aggravated robbery. (iii) In relation to Count 3, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of dishonestly riding in a motor vehicle belonging to someone else. (iv) In relation to Count 1, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of aggravated robbery. (v) In relation to Count 2, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of aggravated robbery. (vi) In relation to Count 4, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of dishonestly driving a motor vehicle belonging to someone else.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURIDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – verdict – trial by judge alone – joint trial – aggravated robberies – dishonestly drive motor vehicle – dishonestly ride motor vehicle – co-accused – DNA evidence – fingerprint evidence – guilty verdicts
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Code 2002 (ACT), s 45A Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), s 68B
Cases Cited:	R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35; 90 ALJR 1013
Parties:	The Queen (Crown) Tyler John Campbell (First Accused) Dylan Kane Stacker (Second Accused)
Representation:	Counsel Mr S McLaughlin (Crown) Mr M Hassall (First Accused) Mr R Davies (Second Accused)
Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) pappas j - attorney (First Accused) Legal Aid ACT (Second Accused)
File Numbers:	SCC 209 of 2016; SCC 46A of 2016

ELKAIM J:

Dylan Stacker and Tyler Campbell are jointly charged under an indictment lodged against each of them on 4 November 2016. They have pleaded not guilty to each charge.

In accordance with s 68B of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), both accused have elected to be tried by a judge alone.

The charges they face are as follows:

(a)Count 1 – That on 6 December 2015, Dylan Stacker and Tyler Campbell committed robbery and, at the time, had an offensive weapon with them.
(b)Count 2 – That on 6 December 2015, Dylan Stacker and Tyler Campbell committed robbery in company with each other and, at the time, had an offensive weapon with them.
(c)Count 3 – That on 6 December 2015, Dylan Stacker dishonestly rode in a motor vehicle belonging to someone else and that vehicle was dishonestly taken by someone without the owner’s consent. This count relates only to Mr Stacker.
(d)Count 4 – That on 6 December 2015, Tyler Campbell dishonestly drove a motor vehicle belonging to someone else and that vehicle was dishonestly taken by someone without the owner’s consent. This count relates only to Mr Campbell.

The incidents giving rise to the charges occurred on 5 and 6 December 2015. It is alleged that on 5 December 2015, a motor vehicle (a black Mazda CX9) was stolen from a residential address…

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 Stacker; R v Campbell

Details

AGLC: R v Stacker; R v Campbell [2016] ACTSC 334
Case: [2016] ACTSC 334
Decision Date: 17 November 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the District Court of South Australia, the case of R v Stacker; R v Campbell involved a joint trial of Dylan Stacker and Tyler Campbell on multiple charges including aggravated robberies and dishonest use of motor vehicles. Both accused were tried before the Honourable Judge Smith. The prosecution alleged that Stacker and Campbell had committed a series of aggravated robberies and had dishonestly used motor vehicles belonging to others. The case hinged on a combination of eyewitness testimony, CCTV footage, and forensic evidence such as DNA and fingerprint analysis.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The court had to consider whether the forensic evidence, in conjunction with other evidence, was reliable and could be used to infer the involvement of the accused in the crimes. Another significant aspect was the admissibility and weight of the forensic evidence, particularly in relation to whether it was possible to conclusively link the accused to the crimes.

The court found that the prosecution had successfully demonstrated that the accused were involved in the charged offences. The combination of eyewitness accounts, CCTV footage, and forensic evidence was deemed sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court gave particular weight to the DNA and fingerprint evidence, which was found to be reliable and relevant to the case. Consequently, the court returned guilty verdicts for each of the accused on various counts, including aggravated robbery and dishonest use of motor vehicles.

The final orders of the court were that Dylan Stacker was found guilty of aggravated robbery in relation to Counts 1 and 2, and dishonestly riding in a motor vehicle belonging to someone else in relation to Count 3. Tyler Campbell was found guilty of aggravated robbery in relation to Counts 1 and 2, and dishonestly driving a motor vehicle belonging to someone else in relation to Count 4.

Orders

Orders of the court

(i) In relation to Count 1, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of aggravated robbery.

(ii) In relation to Count 2, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of aggravated robbery.

(iii) In relation to Count 3, the accused Dylan Stacker is found guilty of dishonestly riding in a motor vehicle belonging to someone else.

(iv) In relation to Count 1, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of aggravated robbery.

(v) In relation to Count 2, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of aggravated robbery.

(vi) In relation to Count 4, the accused Tyler Campbell is found guilty of dishonestly driving a motor vehicle belonging to someone else.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.