Fragomeni v WA

[2011] WASCA 67

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Lies by accused
4. › Whether lies capable of amounting to implied admissions of guilt
5. › Direction to jury
6. › Whether Edwards direction or Zoneff credibility direction required
7. › Whether failure to give adequate directions occasioned miscarriage of justice
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Drug offences
4. › Possession of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply
5. › 845g methylamphetamine
6. › Part of commercial distribution chain
7. › Whether sentence of 10 years manifestly excessive
8. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Leave to appeal
4. › Whether proposed grounds have reasonable prospect of success
5. › Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 27(2)

Quick Take

Where the prosecution relies on lies told by an accused only for credibility purposes and the lies are not capable of supporting an inference of consciousness of guilt, a Zoneff credibility direction is appropriate and an Edwards direction would be inappropriate and potentially adverse to the accused. A sentence of 10 years' imprisonment for possession of 845g of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply, where the offender was part of a commercial distribution chain and committed the offence while on parole for murder, is within the discretionary range.