TAN -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 324
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2003] WASCA 324 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:177/2001 | 7 NOVEMBER 2003 | |
| Coram: | STEYTLER J MCKECHNIE J WALLWORK AJ | 18/12/03 | |
| 37 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal against convictions and application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | KIM TJENG TAN THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Importation of drugs Evidence of prior travel of accused and associates introduced in cross-examination Whether prejudicial to trial Adequate directions concerning the prior travel given by trial Judge Whether sentences excessive Decided on the facts |
Legislation: | Customs Act 1901 (Cth) |
Case References: | Cameron v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 339. , Crofts v The Queen (1996) 186 CLR 427 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665. , Maric v The Queen (1978) 20 ALR 513 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Ferrer-Esis (1991) 55 A Crim R 231 R v Lavery (1979) 20 SASR 430 R v Mustafa (2002) 133 A Crim R 133 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 R v Wright [1999] 3 VR 355 Siganto v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 656 Tripodina v Morabito (1988) 35 A Crim R 183 Winning v The Queen [2003] WASCA 245 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584 Grimwood v The Queen [2002] WASCA 135 Heryadi v The Queen (1998) 19 WAR 383 Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439 Mustafa v The Queen [2001] WASCA 192 R v Boyle (1987) 34 A Crim R 202 R v Ferrer-Esis (1991) 55 A Crim R 231 R v HJS [2001] NSWCCA 55 R v T, unreported; CCA NSW; 15 March 1990 Voong v The Queen [2000] WASCA 220 Wilde v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : TAN -v- THE QUEEN [2003] WASCA 324 CORAM : STEYTLER J
- MCKECHNIE J
WALLWORK AJ
- CCA 8 of 2002
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Importation of drugs - Evidence of prior travel of accused and associates introduced in cross-examination - Whether prejudicial to trial - Adequate directions concerning the prior travel given by trial Judge - Whether sentences excessive - Decided on the facts
Legislation:
Customs Act 1901 (Cth)
(Page 2)
Result:
Appeal against convictions and application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr L M Levy
Respondent : Mr M G A Plummer
Solicitors:
Appellant : Laurie Levy & Associates
Respondent : Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Cameron v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 339
Crofts v The Queen (1996) 186 CLR 427
Lowe v The Queen (1984)…
Continue reading Tan v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Tan v The Queen [2003] WASCA 324
- Case
- [2003] WASCA 324
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Tan v The Queen was heard in an Australian court where the primary dispute involved the importation of drugs. The appellant, Tan, was found guilty and sentenced for his involvement in this matter. The decision was subsequently appealed to the higher court, which dismissed both the appeal against his convictions and the application for leave to appeal against the sentence.
The central legal issues addressed by the court revolved around whether the evidence presented during the cross-examination regarding prior travel of the accused and his associates was prejudicial to the trial. Another issue was whether the trial judge had adequately directed the jury concerning this prior travel. Furthermore, the court was required to determine if the sentences imposed on Tan were excessive, given the facts of the case.
In its reasoning, the court found that the trial judge had appropriately cautioned the jury about the potential prejudicial effect of the evidence regarding the prior travel. It was held that the judge's directions were sufficient to ensure that the jury could properly assess the relevance and weight of this evidence in the context of the trial. Additionally, the court reviewed the evidence and concluded that the sentences imposed were not excessive considering the nature and circumstances of the offence. The court found that the trial judge had exercised his discretion appropriately in determining the appropriate punishment for Tan's actions.
The central legal issues addressed by the court revolved around whether the evidence presented during the cross-examination regarding prior travel of the accused and his associates was prejudicial to the trial. Another issue was whether the trial judge had adequately directed the jury concerning this prior travel. Furthermore, the court was required to determine if the sentences imposed on Tan were excessive, given the facts of the case.
In its reasoning, the court found that the trial judge had appropriately cautioned the jury about the potential prejudicial effect of the evidence regarding the prior travel. It was held that the judge's directions were sufficient to ensure that the jury could properly assess the relevance and weight of this evidence in the context of the trial. Additionally, the court reviewed the evidence and concluded that the sentences imposed were not excessive considering the nature and circumstances of the offence. The court found that the trial judge had exercised his discretion appropriately in determining the appropriate punishment for Tan's actions.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal against convictions and application for leave to appeal against sentence
dismissed
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.