Allan v R

[2017] NSWCCA 6

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Unreasonable verdict
5. › Whether verdict unreasonable having regard to the evidence
6. › DNA evidence
7. › Mishandling and contamination
8. › Secondary transference
9. › Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against conviction
4. › Inconsistent verdicts
5. › Acquittal on one count and conviction on another
6. › Whether verdicts logically reconcilable
7. › Whether jury entitled to accept part of complainant's evidence
1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Sexual assault proceedings
4. › Cross-examination of complainant about prior sexual experience
5. › Whether s 293(6) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) permits cross-examination about prior false allegations of sexual assault
6. › Whether disclosure that complainant was a prostitute triggers s 293(6)
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 293
1. Evidence
2. › Identification evidence
3. › Whether forensic DNA evidence constitutes identification evidence
4. › Whether mandatory warning required under s 116
5. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 116

Quick Take

Forensic DNA evidence matching an accused's DNA profile with DNA found on a complainant does not constitute 'identification evidence' under s 116 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and does not require a mandatory identification warning. Section 293(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) does not authorise cross-examination of a complainant about prior false allegations of sexual assault where the only disclosure in the Crown case is that the complainant was a prostitute, because such cross-examination does not arise 'in relation to' that disclosure.