R v White - [1999] NSWCCA 366

NEW SOUTH WALES CRIMINAL COURT OF APPEAL

CITATION: REGINA v RICKY JAMES WHITE [1999] NSWCCA 366

FILE NUMBER(S):
60592/97

HEARING DATE(S): 20 October 1999

JUDGMENT DATE: 20/10/1999

PARTIES:

REGINA v RICKY JAMES WHITE

JUDGMENT OF: Mason P James J Kirby J

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court - Newcastle

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S):
97/31/0058
LOWER COURT JUICIAL OFFICER: Naughton DCJ

COUNSEL:
Appellant: In person
Crown: C K Maxwell QC (for the Crown)

SOLICITORS:
Appellant: In person
Crown: C K Smith

CATCHWORDS:
Criminal law and procedure - appeal against conviction and sentence - aggravated indecent assault (s61E(1A) of Crimes Act) and aggravated sexual intercourse with child by person in authority (s66C(2)) - alleged inconsistencies in Crown case - claim of bias - sentence - no issue of principle

ACTS CITED:

DECISION:
Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT:

IN THE COURT OF
CRIMINAL APPEAL

CCA 60592/97

MASON P
JAMES J
DAVID KIRBY J

Wednesday 20 October 1999

REGINA v RICKY JAMES WHITE

JUDGMENT

MASON P: The appellant was indicted before his Honour Judge Naughton and a jury at Newcastle on three counts in respect of a complainant KLD. Count 1 was aggravated indecent assault (s 61E(1A) of the Crimes Act). Counts 2 and 3 were aggravated sexual intercourse with a child between ten and fifteen years by a person in authority (s 66C(2)). The appellant pleaded not guilty.
The Crown called five witnesses including the complainant. The complainant's evidence as to the matters charged was clear and, if accepted by the jury, certainly established the offences charged. The complainant and the other witnesses were cross-examined by counsel for the appellant.
After a retirement of about thirty-five minutes the jury convicted the appellant on all three counts.
When called up for sentence on 31 October 1997 the appellant asked the trial judge to take into account three other matters concerning another complainant in respect of whom the appellant had been charged with three counts of aggravated indecent assault.
The appellant was sentenced as follows:
Count 1:A fixed term of penal servitude for one year commencing on 27 October 1997 and expiring on 26 October 1998.
Count 2:A fixed term of penal servitude for two years commencing on 27 October 1997 and expiring on 26 October 1999.
Count 3:(which took into account the Form 1 matters) a minimum term of penal servitude for five years commencing on 27 October 1997 and expiring on 26 October 2002 with an additional term of three years commencing on 27 October 2002 and expiring on 26 October 2005.
The facts relevant to the three counts may be summarised as follows.
Count 1: The complainant was a friend of the appellant's daughter or stepdaughter, AR. She used to stay overnight in AR's home. On about 8 January 1998 the youngest daughter of the appellant was in hospital. Her mother, the appellant's de facto wife, stayed in the hospital for a period to be with the sick child. At that time the appellant was living with his de facto wife and the children. 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 White

Details

AGLC: R v White [1999] NSWCCA 366
Case: [1999] NSWCCA 366
Decision Date: 20 October 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, White, was convicted by a jury in the County Court of aggravated indecent assault of a child under the age of 10, and of aggravated sexual intercourse with a child by a person in authority. White was sentenced to imprisonment for a total of 15 years. White appealed to the Court of Appeal, arguing that there were inconsistencies in the Crown's case, that the trial judge was biased and that the sentence was excessive. The appeal against conviction was dismissed. The appeal against sentence was also dismissed.

The appeal against conviction required the Court to examine the evidence and the trial judge's directions to the jury. The Court found that there were no inconsistencies in the evidence and that the trial judge's directions were appropriate. The Court also found that there was no basis for the claim of bias. The appeal against sentence required the Court to examine the principles of sentencing in cases of aggravated sexual offences against children. The Court found that the sentence was within the range of appropriate sentences for the offences committed.

The Court of Appeal found that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial judge's directions to the jury were appropriate. The Court found that there were no inconsistencies in the evidence and that the trial judge's directions were appropriate. The Court also found that there was no basis for the claim of bias. The Court found that the sentence was within the range of appropriate sentences for the offences committed. The appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.

Orders