Latest Cases Case Lookup LegislationBeta Notebook Research Briefs

R v Cross [2017] ACTSC 91 — Practice And Procedure & Arson Offence — Barrister AI

R v Cross

[2017] ACTSC 91

Supreme Court of the ACT

More

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
3. › Judge-alone trial
4. › criminal responsibility
5. › plea of not guilty by way of mental impairment
6. › prosecution must prove physical elements of offence beyond reasonable doubt
7. › whether accused was suffering from a mental impairment on balance of probabilities.
1. Criminal Law
2. › Arson offence
3. › consequences of mental impairment verdict depend on whether offence is a “serious offence” or not
4. › “serious offence” involves actual or threatened violence
5. › where violence not an element of offence, offence to be assessed as committed
6. › threat only affecting property does not make offence “serious”
7. › offence not “serious”
8. › offence to be dealt with under s 323, Crimes Act 1900 (ACT).

Case Details

Citation[2017] ACTSC 91

CourtACTSC

JurisdictionAustralian Capital Territory

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.

Cited by4

2022R v MatthewsACTSC 105
2022R v DengACTSC 143
2021R v JacksonACTSC 120
2019R v Chute (No 11)ACTSC 91

Relies on8

2016R v AleerACTSC 75
2014R v BarkerACTSC 374
2014R v McGuckin (No 2)ACTSC 365
2012R v SmithACTSC 146
and 4 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in

See how it works