R v Wilson No. Sccrm-00-60

[2000] SASC 265

R v WILSON
[2000] SASC 265

Court of Criminal Appeal:  Olsson, Wicks and Gray JJ
Application for Leave to Appeal in Private

1................ OLSSON J....... In this matter the applicant was refused leave by Duggan J to appeal from his conviction of an offence of armed robbery.

1. He complained that the learned trial judge had erred in refusing to exercise a discretion to exclude evidence of a photographic identification of him, as the offender, by an employee of the store, which was robbed.

2. Duggan J concluded that the evidence of the identification had, in the circumstances, properly been admitted and that the learned trial judge had given appropriate warnings to the jury in relation to its use.

3. The applicant has renewed his application for leave to the Court of Criminal Appeal as presently constituted.  We have considered that application and the supporting material in private, in accordance with the Criminal Proceedings Rules.

4. In our view there is insufficient substance in the complaints sought to be made to warrant a grant of leave.  The identification made was unequivocal, it was supported by compelling circumstantial evidence, the jury viewed a video of the identification process and they were given appropriate directions as to the evidence in question.  We agree with Duggan J that the evidence was properly admitted.  At the end of the day, it was a typical jury question as to what weight ought to be attached to it.

5. Leave to appeal is refused.

7................ WICKS J......................... I agree.

8................ GRAY J.......................... I agree.