R v Wilson - [2018] NSWDC 487

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Wilson [2018] NSWDC 487
Hearing dates: 27 and 28 November 2018, 6 December 2018
Decision date: 06 December 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Ellis DCJ
Decision:
(1) The appeal is upheld.
(2) The conviction and consequential orders of the Local Court are quashed and the appellant is discharged.
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act
Cases Cited: Charara v The Queen (2006) 164 A Crim R 39
Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52
Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250
R v Spiteri-Ahern; R v Barber; R v Zraika (No 11) [2017] NSWSC 1820
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Philip Edward Wilson (Appellant)
Representation:
Counsel:
H Roberts (Crown)
S Odgers SC with S Buchen SC (Appellant)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
Iles Selley Lawyers

File Number(s): 2015/80438
Publication restriction: Pseudonyms replace the names of some witnesses and family members.

Judgment

Background

The accused Philip Edward Wilson was convicted in the Local Court by Local Court Magistrate Stone on 22 May 2018 on one count of

“Whereas James Patrick Fletcher in 1971 committed a serious indictable offence, namely indecent assault of a male, on Peter Aiden Creigh aged 10 years old, Philip Edward Wilson between 22 April 2004 and 7 January 2006 at Maitland and elsewhere in the State of New South Wales, believing that James Patrick Fletcher committed that offence and knowing that he had information which might be of material assistance in securing the prosecution of James Patrick Fletcher for that offence, without reasonable excuse, failed to bring that information to the attention of a member of the New South Wales Police Force.”

On the 14 August 2018 Philip Edward Wilson was sentenced to twelve months imprisonment with a non-parole period of six months which Magistrate Stone directed be served by means of Home Detention. That same day Philip Edward Wilson lodged an appeal against his conviction. The appellant did not appeal the severity of the sentence and he commenced to serve that sentence and continues to do so up to the date of this judgement.
On the 6 September 2018 the Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions lodged an inadequacy appeal.
On the 30 August 2018 the conviction appeal was mentioned and a timetable fixed for the filing of written submissions.
On the 9 November 2018 defence submissions dated 8 November 2018 were filed at the Newcastle Registry.
On the 19 November 2018 Crown submissions were filed. The Crown also filed a summary of the evidence led at the Local Court hearing.
On the 26 November 2018 defence submissions in reply to the Crown submissions were filed.
The hearing of this matter commenced on Tuesday 27 November 2018. Mr. Stephen Odgers SC with Mr. Simon Buchen SC appeared as Counsel for the appellant. Ms. Helen Roberts, Crown Prosecutor, appear as Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions. The hearing commenced by the filing of the various transcripts of the evidence led in the Local Court, 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 Wilson

Details

AGLC: R v Wilson [2018] NSWDC 487
Case: [2018] NSWDC 487
Decision Date: 06 December 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Wilson was heard in the District Court of New South Wales, where the appellant contested the conviction and sentencing imposed by the Local Court. The appellant was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm, arising from an incident where the appellant had engaged in a physical altercation with the complainant. The appellant argued that the actions taken were in self-defence and did not amount to the offence as charged.

The primary legal issue before the court was to determine whether the appellant's actions were justified as self-defence, and if not, whether the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had intentionally or recklessly caused harm to the complainant. The court also had to consider whether the sentence imposed by the Local Court was appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

In delivering the judgment, the court thoroughly examined the evidence presented, including witness testimonies and the circumstances leading up to the altercation. The court found that the appellant's actions, while aggressive, were taken in response to the complainant's aggressive behaviour and were therefore justified under the principles of self-defence. The court concluded that the prosecution had failed to establish the requisite mens rea for the offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Consequently, the appeal was upheld, the conviction was quashed, and the appellant was discharged. The court further directed that the appellant be released immediately unless held on other lawful grounds.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) The conviction and consequential orders of the Local Court are quashed and the appellant is discharged.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Wilson [2018] NSWDC 487
Hearing dates:	27 and 28 November 2018, 6 December 2018
Decision date:	06 December 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Ellis DCJ
Decision:	(1) The appeal is upheld. (2) The conviction and consequential orders of the Local Court are quashed and the appellant is discharged.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act
Cases Cited:	Charara v The Queen (2006) 164 A Crim R 39 Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52 Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250 R v Spiteri-Ahern; R v Barber; R v Zraika (No 11) [2017] NSWSC 1820
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Philip Edward Wilson (Appellant)
Representation:	Counsel: H Roberts (Crown) S Odgers SC with S Buchen SC (Appellant) Solicitors: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions Iles Selley Lawyers
File Number(s):	2015/80438
Publication restriction:	Pseudonyms replace the names of some witnesses and family members.