Jurisdiction. Burden of Proof
|
|
- Lindsey Collins
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Jurisdiction Queensland - Evidence Act (Qld) 1977 Commonwealth Evidence Act (Cth) 1995 Offences against the Commonwealth but tried in a State court - Evidence Act (Qld) 1977 (s79 Judiciary Act (Cth) 1903) Depends on which court had jurisdiction first If appealed to the HC but started in Qld, then EAQ applies Burden of Proof Persuasive burden burden to prove the case or the issue at hand Evidential burden burden to raise sufficient evidence of an issue for it to be put before the jury Criminal cases: Prosecution has the persuasive burden of proof (Presumption of innocence) Must prove each element of the offence Evidential burden is on the accused to put into issue matters of defences, excuses and justification Prosecution has the persuasive burden to disprove excuses (s23 QCC) or justification (s271 QCC) (Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462) EXCEPTIONS Defences (eg. Insanity, provocation (s304 QCC)) the accused has the persuasive burden (or whichever party seeks to put insanity into issue) Standard: o Beyond reasonable doubt o BRD is not to be elaborated on for the jury (R v Chatzidimitriou (2000) 1 VR 493) o Qld Benchbook SD-57 was approved as a direction for BRD in R v BCC [2006] QCA 435 Civil cases: Evidential and persuasive burdens are together BOP with the plaintiff to prove the elements of the cause of action BOP with the defendant to prove the elements of the defence Standard: o Balance of probabilities (> 50%) o The nature of the issue affects the process of achieving satisfaction on BOP (Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 the more improbable a claim seems the more evidence is required to prove it) (Divorce case, wife accused of infidelity, The court held that even though the BOP was the appropriate standard of proof, such an adverse allegation against a woman required strong proof.) 1
2 Standard of proof is sometimes specified in legislation. Eg.s170 of the Penalties and Sentencing Act 1992 (Qld) and s13(3) Dangerous Prisoner s (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). Relevance Probative value the tendency of evidence to prove or disprove facts in issue Relevance must be tested against issues in dispute. Must have logical relevance if one thing makes another more or less likely it is relevant Legal relevance: Hollingham v Head (1858) 140 ER 1135 (K for bat poo, contracts with other people not relevant as E for the current K) R v Stephensen [1976] VR 376 Distinguish relevance from weight Judge decides what is relevant, jury decides how much weight the E holds 1. Is the E relevant? Yes. E might be in. 2. Does an exclusionary rule apply? Yes E might be out. 3. Is there an exception to the exclusionary rule? Yes. E is in. Circumstantial Evidence Evidence that is directly relevant or circumstantially relevant Direct evidence offers proof of issue without any need for inference Circumstantial evidence: Only has probative force by drawing inference Evidence of a secondary fact offered as proof of a principle fact Eg. Motive, credit, opportunity (not confession, eyewitness testimony) Plomp v R (1963) 110 CLR 234: In wholly circumstantial cases only, A can only be found guilty if guilty inference is only rational / reasonable inference available on all the evidence Jury should generally be given direction in those terms Dixon CJ, at 243: according to the common course of human affairs, the degree of probability that the occurrence of the facts proved would be accompanied by the occurrence of the fact to be proved is so high that the contrary cannot reasonably be supposed. Part of rule that guilt must be proved BRD Wilson v R (1970) 123 CLR 334 Man charged with the shooting murder of his wife. Claimed the gun discharged accidentally E of quarrelling in the relationship over a period of time leading up to the incident held to be circumstantially relevant. (CJ. Barwick at 337, 339) Chamberlain v R (No 2) (1983) 153 CLR 521 2
3 Circumstantial evidence is cumulative united force of all the circumstances put together Mason, Gibbs JJ at p535 Shepherd v R (1990) 170 CLR 573 Facts: James William Shepherd was convicted before the Supreme Court of New South Wales of conspiring to import heroin into Australia. The Crown case was that, at some time in 1976, a man named Clark had initiated a conspiracy by setting up an organization which acquired heroin in Bangkok, carried it to Singapore and then imported it into Australia through the agency of couriers. The Crown contended that, after Clark's arrest in 1978, the accused on his instructions took over the running of the organization. The Crown evidence fell into three categories. The first consisted of evidence that after Clark and the accused were arrested, two under-cover police officers overheard Clark tell the accused to take over the reins while he was in gaol. The second category consisted of evidence given by accomplices. The third consisted of evidence concerning financial transactions which the Crown relied on to prove that the accused and Clark shared the income of the organization. Held Dawson J at [579] (Toohey & Gaudron concurring): If it is appropriate to identify an intermediate fact as indispensable it may well be appropriate to tell the jury that that fact must be found beyond reasonable doubt before the ultimate inference can be drawn. But where the evidence consists of strands in a cable rather than links in a chain, it will not be appropriate to give such a warning. It should not be given in any event where it would be unnecessary or confusing to do so. It will generally be sufficient to tell the jury that the guilt of the accused must be established beyond reasonable doubt and, where it is helpful to do so, to tell them that they must entertain such a doubt where any other inference consistent with innocence is reasonably open on the evidence. [580]... the prosecution bears the burden of proving all the elements of the crime beyond reasonable doubt. That means that the essential ingredients of each element must be so proved. It does not mean that every fact every piece of evidence relied upon to prove an element by inference must itself be proved beyond reasonable doubt. So held: if it is necessary for the jury to reach a conclusion of fact as an indispensable intermediate step in the reasoning process towards an inference of guilt, that conclusion must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Whether there is a need for a trial judge to identify such a conclusion and direct the jury as to that standard of proof will depend on the circumstances of the case. Indispensable links in a chain must be proved BRD Judge only required to direct jury to that effect if s/he thinks it necessary Distinguish strands in a rope from links in a chain Explained Chamberlain v R to mean that not every piece of E needs to be proved beyond reasonable doubt if combined they are probative. (at 579,580.) Directions to the jury for case based on Circumstantial Evidence - Qld Benchbook SD-46 Distinguish relevance from weight 3
4 Structure of Evidence Law 1. Relevance all relevant evidence is prima facie admissible, unless excluded (not relevant = inadmissible) 2. Exclusionary Rules! NB: Res gestae overrides exclusionary rules.! Each exclusionary rule has exceptions any apply here? 3. Discretions to exclude! Unfairness! public policy! prejudicial v probative 4. Privilege: Procedural rules, burden of proof, testimonial rules, rules for protecting vulnerable witnesses, jury instructions Voir Dire Before or during the trial Generally outside of jury presence S590AA of the Queensland Criminal Code In relation to facts which must be established in order to determine a question of admissibility, the court only needs to be satisfied on the balance of probabilities: Wendo v R (1963) 109 CLR 559. Hearsay The evidence act does not define hearsay so the common law definition and rules apply. The rule against hearsay is an exclusionary rule. 2 Requirements: 1. Out of court statement or representation (intended to be communicative) 2. For the purpose of proving the truth of the statement s contents 1. Out of court statement: a. Verbal b. Implied statements (unintended assertions) (call for police implies need for help/ in danger) i. Ratten v R [1972] AC 378 c. Statements implied from conduct i. Chandrasekera v R [1937] AC 220 (Conduct which is communicative - a nod of the head indicating agreement or yes ; or a shrug indicating I don t know ) ii. Manchester Brewery v Coombs (1900) 82 LT 347 (Impliedly communicative - throwing away beer, combined with statements that it was bad beer & undrinkable) d. Written Statements documents (document defined in schedule 3 of the EAQ) i. Myers v DPP [1965] AC 1001 (The house of lords considered the admissibility of microfilm records of a car manufacturer. The car 4
5 maker recorded information about each car s engine, chassis and block number. As the car was assembled, a factory worker hand-wrote the information on a record card and photograph s of those cards were later stored on microfilm. Lord Reid noted that this information was hearsay because the company employee who was called to give evidence had no personal knowledge of the correctness of the records. He could only testify that the records had been compiled by others. The purpose of admitting the records was to show that certain cars allege to have been stolen had different engine or chassis numbers than at the time of manufacture. In other words, the cars had been rebirthed. To prove that, evidence needed to be adduced to show what the numbers were at the time of manufacture; and that those numbers had subsequently been altered. That means that the microfilm evidence was to be adduced for the hearsay purpose of establishing the truth/correctness of the records content. ii. Re Gardner (1967) 13 FLR 345 affirmed the approach taken in Myers. In Gardner the question was the admissibility of a used airline ticket to prove that a person named on the ticket had travelled overseas. Gibbs J. pointed out that the document only had probative value because it spoke its contents. If the information on the ticket was accurate, it tended to prove that the person named on the ticket had used it for travel. The document was essentially an assertion of the truth of its contents and that was the point of trying to have it admitted. It was hearsay. e. Can include witness s own out of court statement i. Cases go both ways but usually falls within rules of prior consistent/inconsistent statements 2. For the purpose of proving the truth of the statement s contents a. Is the statement relevant? b. What are the facts in issue? c. What is the purpose of getting the statement admitted into evidence? Hearsay evidence is second hand evidence. It is never as reliable as first hand evidence. Rationales and Criticisms of hearsay evidence a. Pollitt v R (1992) 174 CLR 558 (at , Brennan J. quoting Lord Normand in Lejzor Teper v The Queen [1952] AC 480) i. Hearsay evidence is not the best evidence. ii. It is not delivered under oath. iii. Its truthfulness and accuracy cannot be tested by cross examination. iv. The speaker s demeanour cannot be assessed. v. Easy to fabricate, hard to disprove vi. Trial costs 5
6 Original Evidence Evidence of state of mind or intention. Does not meet the 2 nd part of the definition of hearsay. It is a statement admitted for a purpose other than to prove the truth of the statement s contents. State of mind must be relevant to the facts in issue. (Eg. Speaker s state of mind, hearer s state of mind). Not an exception to the hearsay rule but, admitted as relevant evidence for a nonhearsay purpose. Subramanian v Public Prosecutor [1956] 1 WLR 965 state of mind is relevant because subjective belief was an element of the defense of duress. (Subramanian was kidnapped by terrorists who threatened to kill him unless he obeyed their orders. Those orders included carrying ammunition for the terrorists during their jungle patrols in breach of various weapons laws. S was charged with breaching those laws; the offence was punishable by the death penalty. On appeal, E of the threats was held to be admissible as relevant to a defence of duress. The purpose of adducing the E was not to prove that the terrorists actually intended to kill the man (which would have been hearsay), but to prove S s state of mind; S believed he would have been killed if he had not complied with the terrorists demands). Walton v R (1989) 166 CLR 283 people generally carry out their asserted intentions (if sincerely expressed). Statement was circumstantially relevant to show (with other E) that they ultimately met as planned. Extended the scope of admissibility of this form of original evidence. (A victim s statement that she intended going to meet her estranged husband (the accused) in town, was admissible as evidence of her intention (state of mind) to meet him in town. This E was said to be relevant because the jury might infer that people normally carry out their intentions; and if the victim had carried out her intentions on that occasion, she then might have met with the accused as planned and he might then have had the opportunity to kill her.) R v Hytch [2000] QCA 315 statements of intention to infer (circumstantially) that they met; and to infer motive. ([26] According to Walton a deceased's statements of intention are admissible on the basis that generally people do not assert intentions they do not have and generally they will carry out the intentions they assert. In this case, proof of the existence of [the victim s] intentions is a step towards proving that she met the accused on the night in question. It is a premise of this process that the statement of intention was sincerely made. It is an inference from the existence of the state of mind that the person had carried out the expressed intention. [27] The majority judgment of Wilson, Dawson and Toohey JJ sets out the principle of admissibility in the following passage: Whilst it may be well established that statements will found an inference concerning a state of mind, there are relatively few reported cases on the subject and its limits have not been fully explored... It may be true in some cases to say that statements made by a person indicating his state of mind involve 6
Evidence. 1. Introduction. 1.1 The trial process EA ss 11, Background to The Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and NSW. 1.3 Taking Objections
Evidence 1. Introduction 1.1 The trial process EA ss 11, 26-29 1.2 Background to The Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and NSW Uniform Evidence Law ALRC Evidence Interim and Final Reports would be useful for interpreting
More informationTake the example of a witness who gives identification evidence. French CJ, Kiefel, Bell and Keane JJ stated at [50]:
Implications of IMM v The Queen [2016] HCA 14 Stephen Odgers The High Court has determined (by a 4:3 majority) that a trial judge, in assessing the probative value of evidence for the purposes of a number
More informationEvidence Law is a form of adjectival law (meaning procedural law; relating closely to civil and criminal procedure
Evidence Law is a form of adjectival law (meaning procedural law; relating closely to civil and criminal procedure About the proof of facts before courts and tribunals Best understood in the context of
More informationWhere did the law of evidence come from/why have the law of evidence? Check on the power of executive government (Guantanamo Bay).
INTRODUCTION: Where did the law of evidence come from/why have the law of evidence? Check on the power of executive government (Guantanamo Bay). Courts deal with serious business. The law of evidence excludes
More information4022LAW Evidence Law Notes
4022LAW Evidence Law Notes Hearsay 6 ORIGINAL EVIDENCE: When an out-of-court statement is not hearsay 6 Res gestae and the inclusion of evidence 8 Exceptions to hearsay: statements proving the nature of
More informationCRIM EXAM NOTES. Table of Contents. Weeks 1-4
CRIM EXAM NOTES Weeks 1-4 Table of Contents Setup (jurisdiction, BOP, onus)... 2 Elements, AR, Voluntariness... 3 Voluntariness, Automatism... 4 MR (intention, reckless, knowledge, negligence)... 5 Concurrence...
More informationEvidence A. Weeks 1 & 2 Introduction to the Law of Evidence and Relevance
1 Evidence A Weeks 1 & 2 Introduction to the Law of Evidence and Relevance INTRODUCTION The law of evidence consists of the rules and principles that govern the proof of the facts in issue at a trial.
More informationUNIFORM EVIDENCE LAW GUIDEBOOK
UNIFORM EVIDENCE LAW GUIDEBOOK JOHN ANDERSON AND ANTHONY HOPKINS CHAPTER 2: PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS ASSESSMENT PREPARATION (PP 35-37) REVIEW PROBLEMS ADDITIONAL NOTES Case 1 (a) Facts in issue: Existence
More informationMULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A
MULTI CHOICE QUESTIONS EVI301-A 2010 Second Semester Assignment 1 Question 1 If the current South African law does not provide a solution to an evidentiary problem, our courts will first of all search
More informationIntroduction Crime, Law and Morality. Key Principles: actus reus, mens rea, legal personhood, doli incapax.
Introduction Crime, Law and Morality Key Principles: actus reus, mens rea, legal personhood, doli incapax. Objective Principles: * Constructive-murder rule: a person may be guilty of murder, if while in
More informationHong Kong Evidence Law Notes
Hong Kong Evidence Law Notes 2018 1 st Edition PCLLConversion.com Copyright PCLLConversion.com 2018 Page 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION... 4 A. How to use Conversion Notes... 4 B. Abbreviations and
More informationCIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES Ian Barker QC GENESIS? 1. I do not know just when indirect evidence became known as circumstantial evidence, but the concept has been with us for a long time.
More informationUniversity of Southern Queensland
Arthur Conan Doyle s Critics of Circumstantial Evidence in His Detective Novel, The Boscombe Valley Mystery, and The Law of Circumstantial Evidence in Australia Tung Ho Introduction If an evidence, by
More informationEVIDENCE OF TAPE RECORDINGS By
EVIDENCE OF TAPE RECORDINGS By LA. Wilson* and K.N. Garner** 1. Introduction A recent and most welcome development arising from the Fitzgerald inquiry into corruption in the Queensland police force has
More informationSeminar outline. Not everyone attending is a lawyer. This seminar is being recorded for regional staff and AELERT members outside of Queensland.
Who is attending this seminar? Implications of The Queen v Baden-Clay [2016] HCA 35 for environmental prosecutions Speaker: Dr Chris McGrath Date: 3 November 2016 Hosted by the Qld Department of Environment
More informationAmerican Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary
American Criminal Law and Procedure Vocabulary acquit: affidavit: alibi: amendment: appeal: arrest: arraignment: bail: To set free or discharge from accusation; to declare that the defendant is innocent
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Dustin has been charged with participating
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Scrivener v DPP [2001] QCA 454 PARTIES: LEONARD PEARCE SCRIVENER (applicant/appellant) v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (respondent/respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal
More informationTRIAL DIRECTIONS FOR THE LOCAL COURT ADVOCATE
TRIAL DIRECTIONS FOR THE LOCAL COURT ADVOCATE A paper prepared for the Legal Aid Annual Criminal Law Conference 2014 Slade Howell 1 & Daniel Covington 2 The operation of the general principles have a significance
More informationEVIDENCE CHAPTER 65 EVIDENCE
[CH.65 1 LIST OF AUTHORISED PAGES 1-2 LRO 1/2008 3-8 Original 9-10 LRO 1/2008 11-22 Original 23-24 LRO 1/2008 25-77 Original CHAPTER 65 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title.
More informationLAW550 Litigation Final Exam Notes
LAW550 Litigation Final Exam Notes Important Provisions to Keep in Mind... 2 Voir Dire... 2 Adducing of Evidence Ch 2 Evidence Act... 4 Calling Witnesses... 8 Examination of witnesses... 11 Cross-Examination...
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence/Remedies And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question Green s Grocery Outlet
More informationChapter 4 Types of Evidence
Chapter 4 Types of Evidence Circumstantial evidence is a very tricky thing. It may seem to point very straight to one thing, but if you shift your own point of view a little, you may find it pointing in
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DESMOND D. SANDERS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D17-2489 [ September 20, 2018 ] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the
More information4. RELEVANCE. A. The Relevance Rule
4. RELEVANCE A. The Relevance Rule The most basic rule of evidence is that it must be relevant to the case. Irrelevant evidence should be excluded. If we are trying a bank robbery case, the witnesses should
More informationMLL214 CRIMINAL LAW NOTES
MLL214 CRIMINAL LAW NOTES Contents Topic 1: Course Overview... 3 Sources of Criminal Law... 4 Requirements for Criminal Liability... 4 Topic 2: Homicide and Actus Reus... Error! Bookmark not defined. Unlawful
More informationPCLL Conversion Examination January 2012 Examiner s Comments Evidence
PCLL Conversion Examination January 2012 Examiner s Comments Evidence Question 1 This question was approached badly by too many students who appear not to have understood the question to advise A, S and
More informationTHE CHANGING FACE OF THE RULE AGAINST HEARSAY IN ENGLISH LAW R.A. CLARK*
THE CHANGING FACE OF THE RULE AGAINST HEARSAY IN ENGLISH LAW by R.A. CLARK* The rule against hearsay has always been surrounded by an aura of mystery and has been treated with excessive reverence by many
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 2018 Effective July 1, 1975, as amended to Dec. 1, 2017 The goal of this 2018 edition of the Federal Rules of Evidence 1 is to provide the practitioner with a convenient copy
More informationJury Directions Act 2015
Examinable excerpts of Jury Directions Act 2015 as at 10 April 2018 1 Purposes 3 Definitions Part 1 Preliminary The purposes of this Act are (a) to reduce the complexity of jury directions in criminal
More informationAct 2 Code of Evidence Act 2006
ACTS SUPPLEMENT No. 1 10th February, 2009. ACTS SUPPLEMENT to The Southern Sudan Gazette No. 1 Volume I dated 10th February, 2009. Printed by Ministry Legal Affairs and Constitutional Development, by Order
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Coss [2016] QCA 44 PARTIES: R v COSS, Michael Joseph (appellant/applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 111 of 2015 DC No 113 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT:
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2005 BETWEEN: JAVIER RAMIREZ Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice
More informationCROSS AND TAPPER ON EVIDENCE
CROSS AND TAPPER ON EVIDENCE Twelfth edition COLIN TAPPER, MA, BCL Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS CONTENTS Preface to the 12th edition v Extractfrom the preface
More informationEvidence&in&Proof&and& Theory&
ADELAIDE&UNIVERSITY&! Evidence&in&Proof&and& Theory& [Type&the&document&subtitle]&! Bachelor!of!Law! Semester!2!2014!!! Good!luck! Tips on using these notes First things first: These notes are not a complete
More informationLaw of Evidence MENS REA 1. Law of Evidence
Law of Evidence MENS REA 1 Law of Evidence This subject takes you into the real world of the practice of law and is indeed an invaluable tool to any practitioner. The importance of this subject comes with
More information~~~~~ Week 6. Element of a Crime
~~~~~ Week 6 Element of a Crime PHYSICAL ELEMENTS OF A CRIME (AR) Physical elements may refer to: o A specified form of conduct such as: An act; An omission; or There is a CL duty not to cause harm to
More informationCriminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Act 2014 No 83
New South Wales Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Act 2014 No 83 Contents Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 New South Wales Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence
More informationTHE EVIDENCE ACT OF BHUTAN, 2005
THE EVIDENCE ACT OF BHUTAN, 2005 The ability to call the state laws to witness must be given prime importance, without being influenced solely by what is said by the incumbents. Zhabdrung Rimpochhe THE
More informationT A S M A N I A LAW REFORM I N S T I T U T E
T A S M A N I A LAW REFORM I N S T I T U T E Evidence Act 2001 Sections 97, 98 & 101 and Hoch s case: Admissibility of Tendency and Coincidence Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases with Multiple Complainants
More informationHearsay confessions: probative value and prejudicial effect
Hearsay confessions: probative value and prejudicial effect Don Mathias Barrister, Auckland Hearsay confessions In order to raise a reasonable doubt about the accused s guilt, the defence may seek to call
More informationTrial by Motive. Bond Law Review. David Field Bond University. Volume 29 Issue 2 Article 1
Bond Law Review Volume 29 Issue 2 Article 1 2017 Trial by Motive David Field Bond University Follow this and additional works at: http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr This Article is brought to you by
More informationCanadian Judicial Council Final Instructions. (Revised June 2012)
Canadian Judicial Council Final Instructions (Revised June 2012) Table of Contents Table of Contents...2 Glossary...4 III - FINAL INSTRUCTIONS...5 8. Duties of Jurors...5 8.1 Introduction... 5 8.2 Respective
More informationExamination of witnesses
Examination of witnesses Rules and procedures in the courtroom for eliciting (getting information) from witnesses Most evidence in our legal system is verbal. A person conveying their views and beliefs,
More informationCOMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS APPEALS COURT COMMONWEALTH. vs. JAMES M. BOWEN. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
NOTICE: Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 (2009), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address
More informationSIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE
SIMPLIFIED RULES OF EVIDENCE Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...3 TEXAS CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Title 1, Chapter 38...3 TEXAS RULES OF EVIDENCE Article I: General Provisions...4 Article IV: Relevancy
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07)
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (updated 10/07) In American trials complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to
More informationBurdens of Proof and the Doctrine of Recent Possession
Osgoode Hall Law Journal Volume 1, Number 2 (April 1959) Article 6 Burdens of Proof and the Doctrine of Recent Possession J. D. Morton Osgoode Hall Law School of York University Follow this and additional
More informationTOPIC 1 & 2 Overview, Introduction to the Uniform Evidence Acts and Overarching concepts
TOPIC 1 & 2 Overview, Introduction to the Uniform Evidence Acts and Overarching concepts Overview This week we introduce the structure of the lectures, assessment and relationship between practical legal
More informationDOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE
DOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE Authored by: Aprajita Bhargava* * Research Scholar, Davv, Indore (M.P.) ABSTRACT Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act explains the principle of res gestae. Hearsay evidence is not
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED May 19, 2005 v No. 254007 Wayne Circuit Court FREDDIE LATESE WOMACK, LC No. 03-005553-01 Defendant-Appellant.
More informationCouncil meeting 15 September 2011
Council meeting 15 September 2011 Public business GPhC prosecution policy (England and Wales) Recommendation: The Council is asked to agree the GPhC prosecution policy (England and Wales) at Appendix 1.
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED February 4, 2014 v Nos. 310870; 310872 Macomb Circuit Court DAVID AARON CLARK, LC Nos. 2011-001981-FH;
More informationCalifornia Bar Examination
California Bar Examination Essay Question: Evidence And Selected Answers The Orahte Group is NOT affiliated with The State Bar of California PRACTICE PACKET p.1 Question While driving their cars, Paula
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LAKE COUNTY. CASE No CR
Terri Wood, OSB # Law Office of Terri Wood, P.C. 0 Van Buren Street Eugene, Oregon 0 1--1 Attorney for Defendant IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR LAKE COUNTY STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff,
More informationEVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 LAWS OF KENYA
LAWS OF KENYA EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 Revised Edition 2014 [2012] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2014] CAP. 80 CHAPTER
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Cornwall [2005] QCA 345 PARTIES: R v CORNWALL, Jason Colin (applicant/appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 156 of 2005 DC No 147 of 2005 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING
More informationMAGELLAN MATTERS IN THE FAMILY COURT J BUNNING, COUNSEL 17 AUGUST 2017
MAGELLAN MATTERS IN THE FAMILY COURT J BUNNING, COUNSEL 17 AUGUST 2017 OVERVIEW 1. What is the Magellan Case Management Model, 2. What is abuse, 3. The law in relation to positive findings of abuse and
More informationEVIDENCE LAW SUMMARY 2010
SUMMARY 2010 LAWSKOOL PTY LTD CONTENTS THE NATURE OF EVIDENCE AND PRELIMINARY ISSUES 7 SOURCE OF EVIDENCE LAW AND APPLICATION 7 Criminal versus civil proceedings 7 General structure of the Evidence Act
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2009 JUSTIN MERTIS BARBER, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D06-3529 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. / Opinion filed January 23, 2009
More information2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)
2016 FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) In American trials, complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure that
More informationFEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version)
FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE (Mock Trial Version) (ADOPTED 9/4/2012) INDEX ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS Rule 101 Scope... 1 Rule 102 Purpose and Construction... 1 ARTICLE II. JUDICIAL NOTICE... 1 Rule 201
More informationCOUNSEL JUDGES. STOWERS, J. wrote the opinion. WE CONCUR: DAN SOSA, JR., Senior Justice, WILLIAM RIORDAN, Justice AUTHOR: STOWERS OPINION
1 STATE V. WORLEY, 1984-NMSC-013, 100 N.M. 720, 676 P.2d 247 (S. Ct. 1984) STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. CURTIS WORLEY, Defendant-Appellant No. 14691 SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO 1984-NMSC-013,
More informationAdversary trial Key features Evaluation Review
Chapter 11 Adversary system In this chapter we investigate the main features of the trial system, the reasons why we adhere to it and the problems associated with it. We compare the operation of the adversary
More informationFAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind).
FAULT ELEMENTS, STRICT LIABILITY AND ABSOLUTE LIABILITY CRIME A wrong punishable by the State. Generally involves an actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind). Description of a prohibited behaviour
More informationEVIDENCE LAW SUMMARY
SUMMARY LAWSKOOL PTY LTD Contents TOPIC 1: THE NATURE OF EVIDENCE AND PRELIMINARY ISSUES... 7 SOURCE OF EVIDENCE LAW AND APPLICATION... 7 Criminal versus civil proceedings... 8 General structure of the
More informationS V THE QUEEN [VOL. 21 RICHARD HOOKER*
[VOL. 21 RICHARD HOOKER* Difficulties commonly arise for the Crown in the prosecution of assault cases, particularly of a sexual nature, where the complainant is unable to specify particular acts of the
More informationTendency and Coincidence Evidence in Victoria: Velkoski v The Queen
Tendency and Coincidence Evidence in Victoria: Velkoski v The Queen Andrew Palmer Victorian Bar and Melbourne Law School 1. In Velkoski v The Queen [2014] VSCA 121 at [165] the Court of Appeal said that
More informationSupreme Court of Queensland - Court of Appeal
[Home] [Databases] [WorldLII] [Search] [Feedback] Supreme Court of Queensland - Court of Appeal You are here: AustLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of Queensland - Court of Appeal >> 2008 >> [2008] QCA
More informationMLL214&'CRIMINAL'NOTES' ''''''! Topic 1: Introduction and Overview
! Topic 1: Introduction and Overview Introduction Criminal law has both a substantive and procedural component. o Substantive: defining and understanding the constituent elements of the various common
More informationThe Criminal Court System. Law 521 Chapter Seven
The Criminal Court System Law 521 Chapter Seven The Feds make criminal law and procedure. Criminal Court Structure Provinces responsible for organizing, administering, and maintaining the criminal court
More informationEVIDENCE ACT LAWS OF GRENADA REVISED EDITION CHAPTER 92. Amended by Act No. 7 of 1968 Act No. 12 of 1990 Act No. 9 of 1995 Act No.
LAWS OF GRENADA REVISED EDITION EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 92 Amended by Act No. 7 of 1968 Act No. 12 of 1990 Act No. 9 of 1995 Act No. 26 of 2000 Printed and published with the authority of the Government of
More informationEVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 LAWS OF KENYA
LAWS OF KENYA EVIDENCE ACT CHAPTER 80 Revised Edition 2012 [2010] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org CAP. 80 [Rev. 2012] CAP.
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Till v Johns [2004] QCA 451 PARTIES: FILE NO/S: CA No 209 of 2004 DC No 1 of 2004 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: PETER TILL (applicant/applicant) v ANTHONY
More informationEvidence Act 2001 Sections 97, 98 & 101 and Hoch s
Evidence Act 2001 Sections 97, 98 & 101 and Hoch s case: Admissibility of Tendency and Coincidence Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases with Multiple Complainants FINAL REPORT NO 16 FEBRUARY 2012 CONTENTS
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2005 BETWEEN: DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Appellant AND ISRAEL HERNANDEZ ORELLANO Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley
More informationThe Evidence Act An Introduction
The Evidence Act 2011 An Introduction Evidence WHAT IS IT? The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law. The Evidence Act The laws of evidence consist
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Date: 20171206 Docket: CR 15-01-35066 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Ajak Cited as: 2017 MBQB 202 COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA BETWEEN: ) APPEARANCES: ) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) Libby Standil
More informationSHELDON THOMAS. and THE QUEEN : March 11; October
GRENADA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.11 OF 2002 BETWEEN: SHELDON THOMAS and THE QUEEN Before: The Hon. Sir Dennis Byron The Hon. Mr. Albert Redhead The Hon. Mr. Ephraim Georges Appellant Respondent
More informationEVIDENCE INTRODUCTION TO EVIDENCE LAW I.
EVIDENCE INTRODUCTION TO EVIDENCE LAW I. Nature and Development of Law a. law is largely cultural; based on Anglo-American concept of trial i. But not the only way to do things; e.g. could just listen
More informationAppellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Williams, Venning and Mander JJ. A G V Rogers, M H McIvor and J Kim for Appellant M H Cooke for Respondent
ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF APPELLANT PURSUANT TO S 200 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR
More informationEvidentiary Issues arising in Joint Criminal Trials. Relevant provisions and caselaw. Simon Buchen
Evidentiary Issues arising in Joint Criminal Trials Relevant provisions and caselaw Simon Buchen Introduction: difficulties arising in joint criminal trials Bannon v The Queen (1995) 185 CLR 1 per Deane
More informationVermont Bar Association Seminar Materials. 62nd Mid-Year Meeting. Criminal Law 101
Vermont Bar Association Seminar Materials 62nd Mid-Year Meeting Criminal Law 101 March 22, 2019 Lake Morey Resort Fairlee, VT Speakers: Katelyn Atwood, Esq. Katelyn B. Atwood, Esq. Rutland County Public
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 26, 2006 v No. 263852 Marquette Circuit Court MICHAEL ALBERT JARVI, LC No. 03-040571-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More informationDELAWARE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE
DELAWARE HIGH SCHOOL MOCK TRIAL RULES OF EVIDENCE In American trials, complex rules are used to govern the admission of proof (i.e., oral or physical evidence). These rules are designed to ensure that
More informationCriminal Procedure Exam Notes
Criminal Procedure Exam Notes Table of Contents 1: Components of Crim Justice System, Sources of law, Major Themes (Chapter 1); Courts Exercising Criminal Jurisdiction (Chapter 2) PAGE 2 2: Commencement
More informationEthical issues in enforcement Krista Weymouth Senior Associate. 24 February 2015
Ethical issues in enforcement Krista Weymouth Senior Associate 24 February 2015 Overview Model litigant guidelines and professional conduct rules Letters demanding compliance Investigation of complaints
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No. 17. September Term, 1995 MACK TYRONE BURRELL STATE OF MARYLAND
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 17 September Term, 1995 MACK TYRONE BURRELL v. STATE OF MARYLAND Murphy, C.J. Eldridge Rodowsky Chasanow Karwacki Bell Raker JJ. Opinion by Karwacki, J. Filed: November
More informationThe Law Around a Miscarriage of Justice in Queensland
Bond University Student Law Review Volume 3 Issue 1 Article 2 2007 The Law Around a Miscarriage of Justice in Queensland Dylan Wiltermuth Bond University, dwilterm@student.bond.edu.au Follow this and additional
More informationCASE NO. 1D Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, Tallahassee; Terry P. Roberts of Law Office of Terry P. Roberts, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA JOHNNIE J. JACKSON, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D13-2542
More information4031LAW Criminal Procedure Notes
4031LAW Criminal Procedure Notes Common Law Discretion to Exclude Evidence 6 ʻUnfairnessʼ discretion 6 Public policy discretion 7 Entrapment & Controlled Activities & Operations 9 Is the police activity
More informationEMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE
EMPIRION EVIDENCE ORDINANCE Recognized Objections I. Authority RULE OBJECTION PAGE 001/002 Outside the Scope of the Ordinance 3 II. Rules of Form RULE OBJECTION PAGE RULE OBJECTION PAGE 003 Leading 3 004
More information1. The location or site where a criminal offence has taken place is called a(n)?
Canadian Law 2204 Criminal Law and he Criminal Trial Process Unit 2 Test Multiple Choice Name: { / 85} 1. The location or site where a criminal offence has taken place is called a(n)? death trap investigative
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos CA-101 And 2002-CA-102
[Cite as State v. Kemper, 2004-Ohio-6055.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR CLARK COUNTY, OHIO STATE OF OHIO : Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos. 2002-CA-101 And 2002-CA-102 v. : T.C. Case Nos. 01-CR-495 And
More informationExcluding Admissions
Excluding Admissions (Handout) Arjun Chhabra, Solicitor Aboriginal Legal Service (NSW/ACT) Limited Central South Eastern Region Conference Saturday 2 May 2015 Purpose My talk is on excluding admissions
More informationFall, Criminal Litigation 9/4/17. Criminal Litigation: Arraignment to Appeal. How Do We Get A Case?
Fall, 2017 F Criminal Litigation 20 17 Criminal Litigation: Arraignment to Appeal! Something must go wrong.! A wrongful act must occur. How Do We Get A Case?! If the law states that the wrongful act is
More informationThinking Evidentially
Thinking Evidentially Writing & Arguing Powerful Motions October 17, 2013 2013 www.rossdalecle.com Presentation of Proof Plaintiff (or prosecutor) presents case-in-chief, then rests; When witnesses are
More informationSupreme Court significantly revised the framework for determining the. 221, 590 P2d 1198 (1979), in light of current scientific research and adopt[ed]
I. The Oregon Evidence Code provides the first barrier to the admission of eyewitness identification evidence, and the proponent bears to burden to establish the admissibility of the evidence. In State
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED July 9, 2015 v No. 320838 Wayne Circuit Court CHARLES STANLEY BALLY, LC No. 13-008334-FH Defendant-Appellant.
More information