R v Wood

Case [2019] NSWDC 778


District Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Wood [2019] NSWDC 778
Hearing dates: 8 – 11 October 2019
Date of orders: 11 October 2019
Decision date: 11 October 2019
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:

Verdicts of guilty on counts 1 – 5, and not guilty on count 6: at [79].

Catchwords:

CRIME — Firearms offences — Use/Possess prohibited pistol/firearm - operation of s 4A of the Firearms Act 1996
CRIME — Money laundering — Dealing with money suspected of being proceeds of crime
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judge alone

Legislation Cited:

Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:

Clout v R (1995) 41 NSWLR 312
Fernando v The Queen [1999] NSWCCA 66
Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250
Lowe v R (1997) 98 A Crim R 300
May v The Queen [2012] NSWCCA 250
R v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35
R v Winningham unreported NSWCCA 10 May 1995

Texts Cited:

Nil

Category:Principal judgment
Parties:

Regina (Crown)

  Mason Wood (Accused)
Representation:

Ms L Hanshaw (Solicitor Advocate for the Crown)

  Mr D Roff (Counsel for the Accused)
File Number(s): 2018/171059

Judgment

  1. The accused, Mason Wood, has pleaded not guilty, in a trial by judge alone, to an indictment containing six counts:

  1. Count 1: On 31 May 2018, at East Gosford, he possessed a shortened firearm (#250991), that was not a pistol, without being authorised to do so, contrary to s 62(1)(b) of the Firearms Act1996..

  2. Count 2: On 31 May 2018, at East Gosford, he possessed a shortened firearm (#408297), that was not a pistol, without being authorised to do so, contrary to s 62(1)(b) of the Firearms Act 1996

  3. Count 3: On 31 May 2018, at East Gosford he possessed firearm namely namely, .22 Long Rifle calibre ANSCHUTZ Model 1450 bolt action repeating rifle (#1215599) not being authorised to do so, contrary to s 7A(1) of the Firearms Act 1996.

  4. Count 4: On 31 May 2018, at East Gosford he possessed a firearm that was not registered, namely, .22 Long Rifle calibre ANSCHUTZ Model 1450 bolt action repeating rifle (#1215599) contrary to s 36(1) of the Firearms Act 1996.

  5. Count 5: On 31 May 2018, at East Gosford, he possessed a firearm that was not registered namely, a shortened 12 gauge double barrel shotgun (#408297) contrary to s 36(1) of the Firearms Act 1996.

  6. Count 6: On May 2018, at East Gosford did possess certain property namely, $4950 in Australian currency, in circumstance where that there are reasonable grounds to suspect that $4950 in Australian currency is the proceeds of crime.

Judge alone trial

  1. Where an accused is tried without a jury, section 133 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 imposes certain obligations in relation to evidence relied upon by the Judge in reaching a verdict. That section provides:

133 Verdict of single Judge

(1) A Judge who tries criminal proceedings without a jury may make any finding that could have been…

Continue reading R v Wood

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Wood [2019] NSWDC 778
Case
[2019] NSWDC 778
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wood was convicted in the County Court of Victoria on five charges relating to firearms and money laundering offences. The court was required to determine whether the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that Wood was in possession of a prohibited pistol, used the pistol, and was involved in dealing with money suspected to be the proceeds of crime. The court also had to decide whether Wood had the requisite intent to commit the offences. The central issues included the admissibility of certain evidence, the interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions, and the application of the principles of criminal law to the facts of the case. The court considered whether the evidence was sufficient to establish Wood's possession and use of the prohibited pistol, and whether the money laundering charges were adequately supported. The court held that the prosecution had proven the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The reasoning included a detailed analysis of the evidence, particularly the testimony of witnesses and the interpretation of the statutory provisions under the Firearms Act 1996 and related legislation. The court found that the evidence was reliable and that Wood had the requisite intent to commit the offences. The court found Wood guilty on counts 1 to 5, and not guilty on count 6.

Orders

Orders of the court

Verdicts of guilty on counts 1 – 5, and not guilty on count 6: at [79].

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.