SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND"

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v MCE [2015] QCA 4 PARTIES: R v MCE (appellant) FILE NO: CA No 186 of 2014 DC No 198 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against Conviction District Court at Rockhampton DELIVERED ON: 6 February 2015 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 4 December 2014 JUDGES: ORDER: CATCHWORDS: COUNSEL: SOLICITORS: Fraser, Gotterson and Morrison JJA Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made Appeal against conviction dismissed. CRIMINAL LAW APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL VERDICT UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE HAVING REGARD TO EVIDENCE where the appellant was found not guilty of rape but guilty of the alternative charge of indecent treatment of a child under 16 where the appellant claimed that the complainant was not a credible or reliable witness whether the jury s verdict was unreasonable in light of the evidence MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53, cited SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13, cited The appellant appeared on his own behalf B J Power for the respondent The appellant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent [1] FRASER JA: On the afternoon of the third day of a trial in the District Court a jury found the appellant not guilty of rape but guilty of the alternative charge of indecent treatment of a child under 16 with the circumstance of aggravation that the child was under 12 years of age. The appellant has appealed against the verdict on

2 2 the ground that it is unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence. The appellant also applied for leave to appeal against sentence but he filed a notice of abandonment of that application before the hearing. [2] The appellant s ground of appeal against conviction requires the Court to make an independent assessment of the sufficiency and quality of the evidence and to decide whether upon the whole of the evidence it was reasonably open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of the offence. 1 If the Court is left with a reasonable doubt whether the appellant is guilty, it will only be where the jury s advantage of seeing and hearing the evidence can explain the jury s different conclusion that the Court may decide that no miscarriage of justice has occurred; if, after making full allowance for the advantages enjoyed by the jury, there is a significant possibility that an innocent person has been convicted, then the court is bound to act and to set aside a verdict based upon that evidence. 2 [3] The Crown case depended upon the evidence of the complainant, who was the appellant s step-daughter. Evidence of a preliminary complaint by the complainant was given by her mother and by a friend of the complainant s mother. The complainant s mother also gave evidence of a confession by the appellant. The offence was alleged to have been committed on an unspecified date during an identified period of about six weeks in the first half of The complainant was seven years old at that time and also when she was interviewed by police about ten days after the conclusion of that period. She gave pre-recorded evidence when she was nine years old. [4] In the police interview, which was tendered in evidence under s 93A of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), the complainant responded to an initial question about why she was talking to police by saying that daddy put his finger in my hoo hoo. The complainant said that A (a child of the appellant and the complainant s mother, who was about three or four years old at the time of the alleged offence) was asleep on the bed and the complainant and B (another, younger child of the appellant and the complainant s mother) were asleep on the floor. The appellant must have put A on the floor and the complainant on the bed while she slept. When the appellant started doing it she woke up and told him to stop doing it please. The appellant asked her what he was to stop doing and she responded to stop putting that finger in her hoo-hoo. The appellant said okay. The complainant went back to sleep. The complainant was asked to tell the police more about what the appellant did. She mentioned that he had her pants off and it felt scary. Later in the interview when asked whether she remembered what the appellant was wearing she said that he was wearing nothing. The complainant said that she was too scared to tell anyone about what had happened. She told her mother. Her mother told her not to tell anyone. She could not remember her mother speaking to the appellant about it. [5] In the complainant s pre-recorded evidence, admitted in evidence under s 21AW of the Evidence Act, the complainant affirmed the truth of what she had said in the police interview. The complainant maintained her account during a detailed cross examination. She said that the appellant had touched her hoo-hoo but that he had not done it in a bad way. She went on to explain that she meant that he had never done it before at all. The complainant agreed that when she returned to bed after 1 2 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606 at ; SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400 at 406 [14], 408 [21]. MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606 at , quoting from M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 at 525.

3 3 going to the toilet she did not speak to the appellant. The appellant did not say anything like, it s our little secret and he did not tell her not to tell her mother. The complainant agreed that the appellant did not tell her, if you tell anyone about this, you ll be in trouble or anything like that. The complainant said that she told her mother about it in the next couple of weeks. When the complainant was asked whether the appellant running his finger up and down on the inside of her hoo-hoo hurt her, she responded that it did so only at the bottom. It did not hurt a lot and it did not make her cry. In re-examination the complainant said that she did not tell her mother straight away because she was scared that she would get in trouble. [6] The complainant s mother gave evidence that she was in a relationship with the appellant from about In the early part of 2011 they had a rocky relationship, which was on and off in the last 12 months of the relationship. The children stayed with them. The complainant was then in grade 2 at school. For a period early in April 2011 the complainant s mother stayed with a friend because she had some difficulties with the appellant and moved out. On at least one occasion during that period the children stayed with the appellant whilst she worked. On one occasion the complainant s mother and her children were all at the appellant s place in one room. The complainant s mother told the complainant that one of the younger children would sleep in the bed with the complainant s mother and the complainant could sleep in the other bed. The complainant said that she didn t want to sleep in the bed with the appellant after what had happened last time. The complainant started crying. The complainant s mother started to ask the complainant questions about what had happened last time. The complainant told her mother that when she was sleeping in bed with the appellant he was running his finger up and down her hoo-hoo, a term the complainant used for her vagina. The complainant said that this had woken her up and she asked the appellant to stop it. He asked her what he was to stop. The complainant told the appellant to stop running his finger up and down her hoo-hoo. The appellant replied, okay darling. The complainant went back to sleep. The complainant said this happened at a night when her mother was working. [7] The complainant s mother gave evidence that she raised this in a discussion at which the appellant and the complainant were present about two days afterwards. The complainant repeated what she had said to her mother. The complainant s mother said that the appellant s response was, if that is what she had said had happened, if she was 100 per cent correct then that s what had happened. The appellant did not deny the allegation. The complainant did not say anything in response to what the appellant said. [8] In cross-examination the complainant s mother agreed that she had moved out of the house she shared with the appellant in February 2011 and stayed with a friend for a while. She moved back in with the appellant at the end of March 2011 for a little while and the complainant made her disclosure in that period. The complainant s mother disagreed with defence counsel s suggestion that there were times when the children were left at home with the appellant in that period. The complainant s mother agreed that, leading up to the separation and until she moved back into the household, she wanted to move away taking the children with her. The complainant s mother disagreed with defence counsel s suggestion that the appellant objected to that because he did not want her taking the children so far away. She said that they had never had that discussion. The appellant did not ever say that she was not allowed to go with the children.

4 4 [9] The complainant s mother agreed that she had told police that the complainant told her that, I woke up because Daddy was running his finger up and down my hoo-hoo and that, I woke him up and asked him to stop. And he said, stop what? I said, running your finger up and down my hoo-hoo. And he said, okay darling, and went and then went to sleep. In relation to the statement I woke him up the complainant s mother agreed that this was what she told police, but she added that it was a very traumatic time and what the complainant actually said was that she had woken up to the appellant doing that. The complainant s mother said that the complainant did not say that she woke up the appellant; rather, the complainant said that she woke up to the appellant doing it. [10] The complainant s mother agreed that in the conversation when she, the complainant, and the appellant were present, the complainant accused the appellant of running his finger up and down her hoo-hoo but did not say that the appellant put it inside her hoo-hoo. It was put to the complainant s mother that the appellant replied, I don t recall it happening. But if you re 100 per cent sure, then I must have done it. The complainant s mother said that she did not recall the appellant saying that he did not recall it happening. She agreed that she had told police that the appellant had said, I don t recall it happening but if you re 100 per cent sure, then I must have done it. She agreed that this was possibly more accurate and then accepted that it is what the appellant said at the time. When it was put to the complainant s mother that the appellant had denied that it had happened, she said that the appellant had never said that he did not do it or that it wasn t him. He had never denied it. The appellant had said, without emotion in his voice, that, this might have happened or that may have happened or maybe I rolled over and accidently touched her. The complainant s mother said that the closest to any sort of denial was when the appellant said to her, Don t be silly, why would I do that? The complainant s mother agreed that she told the police that she had rung the appellant and that he denied that he had done it. In saying that she did not mean that the appellant said, no I never did that but was referring to his statement, Why would I do that, don t be silly. The complainant s mother agreed that the appellant told her that he understood if she had to go to the police about it and he did not try to talk her out of going to the police. The complainant s mother agreed that she had not told the complainant that she should not talk to people about this. [11] The friend of the complainant s mother ( B ) gave evidence that in April 2011 the complainant s mother and her children came to B s house. B spoke to the complainant in the presence of the complainant s mother. The complainant told B (who she referred to as an aunt) that, I don t like what daddy did. The complainant started crying. She said that she woke up with her pyjamas pants off and that she didn t like what the appellant did. The complainant did not give any greater detail and cried a lot. In cross examination B agreed with defence counsel s suggestion that the complainant said something along the line, I just didn t like what daddy did. When I woke up, my jammie pants were off. I just don t want it to happen again. [12] The appellant did not give or call evidence. Consideration [13] In relation to the charge of rape, the trial judge directed the jury that the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant penetrated the vagina or the vulva of the complainant to any extent. The trial judge remarked that the central

5 5 matter to be considered was whether the prosecution had proved that the appellant penetrated the complainant s vulva and/or vagina with his finger. If they had a reasonable doubt about that the verdict must be not guilty. This charge was based upon the complainant s evidence that the appellant had put his finger inside her. However that was not stated in the complainant s mother s evidence of what the complainant said to her, it was not stated in the complainant s mother s evidence of what the complainant said when the appellant was present, it was not stated in B s evidence of what the complainant said, and the jury might also have taken into account the complainant s evidence that what the appellant did to her did not hurt much. With that evidence in mind as well as the emphasis in the summing up of the requirement for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the jury might have been unwilling to convict the appellant of the more serious charge even though the jury regarded the complainant as a credible witness. [14] Accordingly, the jury s acquittal on the charge of rape is not inconsistent but is readily reconcilable with the guilty verdict upon the alternative charge of indecent dealing. The appellant, who appeared for himself and adopted his written argument, did not argue to the contrary. Rather, the theme underlying the appellant s argument was that the complainant s mother in some way persuaded the complainant to complain that the appellant had touched her in a bad way. For example, the appellant attributed the complainant s statement that the appellant had touched her on the inside of her vagina, which had not earlier been mentioned, to the influence of the complainant s mother upon the evidence given by the complainant. There was, however, no evidence that the complainant s mother said or did anything in an attempt to influence the complainant s evidence in any way or that the complainant s evidence was influenced by anything her mother said or did. [15] The same is true in relation to the appellant s argument about the complainant s evidence that the appellant had not touched her in a bad way, that he had touched her, and that she meant by her statement that he had not touched her in a bad way that he had never done it before at all. The appellant argued that the complainant initially spoke the truth before she remembered what she was supposed to say. This passage of evidence raised an issue for the jury to consider, but in the absence of any evidence of an attempt to influence the complainant s evidence it is unsurprising that the jury accepted her explanation of what she meant. [16] Much of the argument advanced by the appellant was based upon what the appellant said in his written argument had happened. Because the appellant did not give evidence at the trial, this cannot be taken into account in assessing the reasonableness of the verdict. It is therefore not helpful to refer to those parts of the appellant s argument. [17] The appellant argued that he looked after the complainant as if she was his own daughter and he would not have touched her private parts intentionally. Again, in the absence of any evidence contradicting the complainant s evidence, it cannot be said that the jury acted unreasonably in convicting the appellant. [18] There was also no evidence to support another important aspect of the appellant s argument: that he and the complainant s mother had argued about the complainant s mother wanting to move away with the children and he had refused to allow it. The only evidence on this point was the evidence of the complainant s mother that this had not been a topic of discussion.

6 6 [19] The appellant relied upon the evidence of the complainant s mother that she told the police that the complainant had said that she woke the appellant up and asked him to stop. The trial judge referred to the evidence relating to this point in the course of summing up and it was no doubt taken into account by the jury, who had the advantage of seeing and hearing the complainant s mother giving evidence. The jury, whilst taking this point into account, could reasonably act upon the evidence of the complainant that she was asleep and awoke to the appellant dealing with her. The jury might also have considered that it was too unlikely to be true that the appellant could have been asleep when, as the complainant said, the appellant ran his finger up and down in the way she described. [20] In other respects the appellant s argument amounted to denials of the truth of evidence given by the complainant s mother or the complainant. Again, this cannot be taken into account in circumstances in which the appellant did not give evidence. [21] There was no ground of appeal challenging the summing up or any direction given by the trial judge. Nor was there any contention to that effect in the appellant s argument. The only question for the Court raised in this appeal was whether or not the verdict of the jury was unreasonable or could not be supported having regard to the evidence. The complainant s account about the indecent dealing offence was given in apparently persuasive and credible terms and it was consistent with the evidence of her complaint to her mother and (in a more limited way) her complaint to B. There were various inconsistencies in the evidence, but their individual and cumulative effects do not seem to be very significant and they were drawn to the jury s attention. Upon the whole of the evidence, and having regard to the jury s advantage of seeing and hearing all of the evidence as it was given, it was reasonably open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of the offence of which he was convicted. No ground has been established which would justify the Court in setting aside the verdict. Order [22] I would order that the appeal against conviction be dismissed. [23] GOTTERSON JA: I agree with the order proposed by Fraser JA and with the reasons given by his Honour. [24] MORRISON JA: I agree with the order proposed by Fraser JA and with the reasons given by his Honour.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Galigan [2017] QCA 231 PARTIES: R v GALIGAN, Robert Brian (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 53 of 2017 DC No 61 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court

More information

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA82/2014 [2014] NZCA 304 BETWEEN AND TOESE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v S [2000] QCA 256 PARTIES: R v S (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 80 of 2000 DC No 80 of 1999 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v M [2003] QCA 380 PARTIES: R v M (applicant/appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 92 of 2003 DC No 334 of 2003 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal

More information

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. N M Dutch for Appellant I R Murray and R K Thomson for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. N M Dutch for Appellant I R Murray and R K Thomson for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 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 NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Hoet [2016] QCA 230 PARTIES: R v HOET, Reece Karaitana (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 64 of 2016 DC No 548 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Maddison [2013] QCA 132 PARTIES: R v MADDISON, Steven Robert (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 328 of 2012 DC No 285 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2006 BETWEEN: LAURIANO RAMIREZ Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v SCG [2014] QCA 118 PARTIES: R v SCG (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 37 of 2014 DC No 59 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. J U Mooney for Appellant JEL Carruthers for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. J U Mooney for Appellant JEL Carruthers for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA297/2017 [2017] NZCA 535 BETWEEN AND CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 15 November 2017 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Harrison, Lang and

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v SCW [2018] QCA 10 PARTIES: R v SCW (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 104 of 2017 DC No 959 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN v CLIFFORD ANDREW RODGER CoramEichelbaum CJ Tipping J Goddard J Hearing 30 April 1998 Counsel H Croft for Appellant S P France for Crown Judgment

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v RAX [2017] QCA 133 PARTIES: R v RAX (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 291 of 2016 DC No 224 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal

More information

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA ATTANGA {CORAM: MBAROUK, J.A., MWARIJA, J.A. And MWANGESI. J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 391 of 2016 CHARLES JUMA............ APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.......................

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee On Appeal from the Fayette County Court of Appeals, 12"' Appellate District

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee On Appeal from the Fayette County Court of Appeals, 12' Appellate District IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO STATE OF OHIO : CASE NO. 08-1864 vs. Plaintiff-Appellee On Appeal from the Fayette County Court of Appeals, 12"' Appellate District EDWARD WELTON JR. Defendant-Appellant Court

More information

DAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

DAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985 AND S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. IN THE

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU In the matter between: CASE NO: A15/2012 MPHO SIPHOLI MAKHIGI RAMULONDI KHUMBUDZO First Appellant Second Appellant

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Warradoo [2014] QCA 299 PARTIES: R v WARRADOO, Charles Christopher (appellant/applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 274 of 2013 SC No 31 of 2013 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING

More information

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FRENCH C, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND KEANE DANG KHOA NGUYEN APPELLANT AND THE QUEEN RESPONDENT Nguyen v The Queen [2013] HCA 32 27 une 2013 M30/2013 ORDER 1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v D [2003] QCA 148 PARTIES: R v D (appellant/applicant) FILE NO/S: CA No 207 of 2002 CA No 232 of 2002 DC No 163 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDINGS: ORIGINATING COURT:

More information

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas

Court of Appeals. First District of Texas Opinion issued October 17, 2013 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas NO. 01-12-00664-CR NO. 01-12-00665-CR JUNIOR GARVEY, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEMINGWAY. Between ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER. and

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEMINGWAY. Between ENTRY CLEARANCE OFFICER. and IAC-AH-SAR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Bradford Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 27 th October 2015 On 6 th November 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v D [2002] QCA 445 PARTIES: R v D (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 189 of 2002 DC No 1351 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT MACKENDY CLEDENORD, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D16-1566 [ May 23, 2018 ] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Dawson v Jewiss; Thompson v Jewiss [2004] QCA 374 PARTIES: STUART BEVAN DAWSON (plaintiff/respondent) v HENRY WILLIAM JEWISS also known as HARRY JEWISS (defendant/appellant)

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT RUBEN M. TIRADO, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D15-802 [May 3, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

More information

MOLOI, J et MOHALE, AJ

MOLOI, J et MOHALE, AJ SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION,

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MBEYA (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MANDIA, J.A.)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MBEYA (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MANDIA, J.A.) Dr. Moses Norbert Achiula versus Republic IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MBEYA (CORAM: MSOFFE, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And MANDIA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2012 MOSES NORBERT ACHIULA.APPELLANT

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v MCQ [2018] QCA 160 PARTIES: R v MCQ (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 268 of 2017 SC No 1068 of 2017 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal DELIVERED

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2015 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 19 OF BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2015 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 19 OF BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2015 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 19 OF 2013 MARVIN CRUZ REYES Appellant v THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa The Hon Mr Justice Samuel Awich The Hon

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Neutral citation: Madiba v The State (497/2013) [2014] ZASCA 13 (20 March 2014)

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Neutral citation: Madiba v The State (497/2013) [2014] ZASCA 13 (20 March 2014) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN. CASE NO: CA&R 361/2014 Date heard: 5 August 2015 Date delivered: 13 August 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN. CASE NO: CA&R 361/2014 Date heard: 5 August 2015 Date delivered: 13 August 2015 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE DIVISION,

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS JESUS CASTILLO, Appellant, V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. O P I N I O N No. 08-08-00332-CR Appeal from the 346th Judicial District Court of El

More information

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the appeal between:- Appeal No. : A176/2008 BRAKIE SAMUEL MOLOI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: EBRAHIM, J et LEKALE, AJ HEARD

More information

RENDERED: AUGUST 30, 2002; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED NO CA MR COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** **

RENDERED: AUGUST 30, 2002; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED NO CA MR COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY OPINION AFFIRMING ** ** ** ** ** RENDERED: AUGUST 30, 2002; 10:00 a.m. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED C ommonwealth Of K entucky Court Of A ppeals NO. 2001-CA-002226-MR JAMES ROBINSON APPELLANT APPEAL FROM FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JOHN

More information

JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent

JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA361/2016 [2017] NZCA 69 BETWEEN AND JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: Court: Counsel: Judgment: 15 February 2017 (with an application

More information

kenyalawreports.or.ke

kenyalawreports.or.ke REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS APPELLATE SIDE HIGH COURT CRIMINAL APPEAL 184 OF 2002 (From Original Conviction(s) and Sentence(s) in Criminal Case No 1320 of 2001 of the Principal

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 30, 2007

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 30, 2007 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs October 30, 2007 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. SCOTT G. CLEVENGER Appeal from the Circuit Court for Grainger County No. 4190 O. Duane

More information

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Winkelmann, Peters and Collins JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Winkelmann, Peters and Collins JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA508/2015 [2016] NZCA 138 BETWEEN AND MRINAL SARDANA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 8 March 2016 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Winkelmann, Peters and Collins

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA ,. I I: ' IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA (1) R,EPORTABLE: YES/ NO (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/ NO (3) REVISED a., 11 tidtf: a.t. DATE SIGNATURE CASE NUMBER: A178/16

More information

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Sherri T. Rollison, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Sherri T. Rollison, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA GERALD YARBROUGH, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE DIVISION, CAPE TOWN) SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE

More information

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT

BRIEF OF THE APPELLANT E-Filed Document Mar 2 2016 17:00:55 2015-KA-00934-COA Pages: 11 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI JASON BOZEMAN APPELLANT V. NO. 2015-KA-00934-COA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between Not Reportable CASE NO 444/2006 N E VHENGANI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent Coram: Nugent, Jafta JJA and Snyders AJA Heard: 21 MAY

More information

ADDIE NKOSINGIPHILE SHABANGU

ADDIE NKOSINGIPHILE SHABANGU SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION,

More information

No. 1D On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. John H. Skinner, Judge. April 18, 2018

No. 1D On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. John H. Skinner, Judge. April 18, 2018 FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL LEO C. BETTEY JR., Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA No. 1D17-0064 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County. John H. Skinner, Judge. April

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Watt [2007] QCA 286 PARTIES: R v WATT, Gregory Thomas (appellant) FILE NO: CA No 122 of 2007 DC No 211 of 2007 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. The Hon. Mr. Justice Michael Gordon, QC The Hon. Mr. Justice Denys Barrow, SC

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL. and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS. The Hon. Mr. Justice Michael Gordon, QC The Hon. Mr. Justice Denys Barrow, SC SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1 OF 2005 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: JAVA LAWRENCE and THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS Appellant Respondent Before: The Hon. Mr. Justice Brian Alleyne,

More information

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES. Staff Sergeant WALTER M. PATTON IV United States Air Force ACM S30426

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES. Staff Sergeant WALTER M. PATTON IV United States Air Force ACM S30426 UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES v. Staff Sergeant WALTER M. PATTON IV United States Air Force 8 February 2006 Sentence adjudged 17 May 2003 by SPCM convened at Fort George

More information

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2015 FRANCIS MADIKAEGBU STATE OF MARYLAND

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2015 FRANCIS MADIKAEGBU STATE OF MARYLAND UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 487 September Term, 2015 FRANCIS MADIKAEGBU v. STATE OF MARYLAND Eyler, Deborah S., Wright, Rodowsky, Lawrence F. (Retired, Specially Assigned),

More information

UNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

UNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES NAVY MARINE CORPS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS No. 201400356 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Appellee v. JEFFERY D. SAGER Aviation Ordnanceman Airman (E-3), U.S. Navy Appellant Appeal from the United

More information

IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG CASE NO: CAF 7/10. TSHEPO BOSIELO Appellant

IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG CASE NO: CAF 7/10. TSHEPO BOSIELO Appellant IN THE NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG In the matter between:- CASE NO: CAF 7/10 TSHEPO BOSIELO Appellant ATANG BOSIELO First Second Appellant and THE STATE Respondent FULL BENCH APPEAL HENDRICKS J; LANDMAN

More information

Eleventh Court of Appeals

Eleventh Court of Appeals Opinion filed August 5, 2010 In The Eleventh Court of Appeals No. 11-09-00041-CR ARNOLD P. POWERS, Appellant V. STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 4 Tarrant County,

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) 1 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at: Field House Determination Promulgated On: 18 December 2014 On: 13 August Before

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at: Field House Determination Promulgated On: 18 December 2014 On: 13 August Before Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/39272/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Determination Promulgated On: 18 December 2014 On: 13 August 2015 Before DEPUTY UPPER

More information

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO. APPELLANT S / RESPONDENT S FACTUM (Select One)

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO. APPELLANT S / RESPONDENT S FACTUM (Select One) C.A. N o A-226-09 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO BETWEEN: TYSON ROY (Appellant) - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondents) APPELLANT S / RESPONDENT S FACTUM (Select One) NAME OF LAW FIRM Address of law firm

More information

Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an

Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an Rajen Hanumunthadu v The state and the independent commission against corruption. 2010 SCJ 288 Judgment delivered on 01 September 2010 This was an appeal from the Intermediate Court where the Appellant

More information

Cotton, T. (2010) 'Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire', Journal of Criminal Law, 74 (5), pp

Cotton, T. (2010) 'Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire', Journal of Criminal Law, 74 (5), pp TeesRep - Teesside's Research Repository Court of appeal: Confession evidence and the circumstances requiring a voir dire Item type Authors Citation DOI Publisher Journal Additional Link Rights Article

More information

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 1 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.164 OF 2004 COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM MUNUO, J.A MSOFFE, J.A AND KILEO J.A Nurdin Musa Wailu Vs, The Republic (Appeal from the Conviction of the High Court of Tanzania

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Nieves, 2010-Ohio-514.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 92797 STATE OF OHIO vs. CARLOS NIEVES PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. HOWARD WESLEY WEEDON, Appellant No. 2032 MDA 2014 Appeal from

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between: Appeal number: A242/2015 S.P. LETEANE Appellant and THE STATE Respondent HEARD ON: 29 FEBRUARY 2016 CORAM: MOCUMIE,

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT PETERSON BALTAZARE SIMBERT, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D16-1633 [August 23, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DANIEL MEDINA, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D17-358 [September 5, 2018] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

More information

DISCIPLINE CASE DIGEST

DISCIPLINE CASE DIGEST DISCIPLINE CASE DIGEST Case 16-10 Member: Jurisdiction: James Graeme Earle Young Winnipeg, Manitoba Called to the Bar: June 16, 2005 Particulars of Charges: Professional Misconduct (11 Counts): Breach

More information

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The application for an extension of time within which to appeal is granted.

Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The application for an extension of time within which to appeal is granted. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA542/2016 [2017] NZCA 212 BETWEEN AND JOHN SIONA MOALA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 10 May 2017 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Harrison, Gilbert and Katz JJ

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CA&R 46/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE DIVISION, GRAHAMSTOWN) CA&R 46/2016 SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Buchan v Nominal Defendant [2012] QCA 136 PARTIES: JOHN DAVID BUCHAN (appellant) v NOMINAL DEFENDANT (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 11763 of 2011 SC No 7075 of

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Reitano v Shearer & Anor [2014] QCA 336 PARTIES: MONICA-LEIGH REITANO (appellant) v BENJAMIN JOHN SHEARER (first respondent) RACQ INSURANCE LIMITED ABN 50 009 704

More information

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Court of Appeals of Ohio [Cite as State v. Nixon, 2007-Ohio-160.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 87847 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. LAKISHA NIXON DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

More information

JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA. SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the 6 th December, 2011 and 8 th May, 2012

JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA. SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the 6 th December, 2011 and 8 th May, 2012 IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR ZAMBIA HOLDEN AT NDOLA (Criminal Jurisdiction) SCZ/103/2011 BETWEEN: JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA APPELLANT VS THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT Coram: SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. FELIX GARZON, Appellant No. 492 EDA 2014 Appeal from the Judgment

More information

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CR. ANTHONY SHANE KILLEBREW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CR. ANTHONY SHANE KILLEBREW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee MODIFY and AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed March 16, 2015. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01511-CR ANTHONY SHANE KILLEBREW, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On

More information

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA MEDIA SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL FROM The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal DATE 29 September 2015 STATUS Immediate Negondeni

More information

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE L MURRAY

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE L MURRAY Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06052/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Columbus House, Newport Sent to parties on: On 3 April 2017 On 23 May 2017 Before DEPUTY UPPER

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG) CASE NO: CA186/04. In the matter between: and FULL BENCH APPEAL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG) CASE NO: CA186/04. In the matter between: and FULL BENCH APPEAL In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST HIGH COURT, MAFIKENG) CASE NO: CA186/04 NEO NGESI APPELLANT and THE STATE RESPONDENT FULL BENCH APPEAL MOGOENG JP; LANDMAN J & KGOELE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No. [Cite as State v. Treesh, 2008-Ohio-5630.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. WM-08-006 Appellee Trial Court No. 06 CR 141 v. James

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: S J Sanders Pty Ltd v Schmidt [2012] QCA 358 PARTIES: S J SANDERS PTY LTD ACN 074 002 163 (appellant) v HEINZ JOHANN SCHMIDT (respondent) FILE NO/S: Appeal No 6370

More information

Mutua Mulundi v Republic [2005] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS

Mutua Mulundi v Republic [2005] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS Criminal Appeal 23 of 2003 (From Original conviction (s) and Sentence (s) in Criminal Case No. 720 of 2001 of the Resident Magistrate s Court at

More information

No. 1D On appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County. Andrew J. Decker, III, Judge. August 24, 2018

No. 1D On appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County. Andrew J. Decker, III, Judge. August 24, 2018 FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA No. 1D17-836 TYRONE D. WALLACE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamilton County. Andrew J. Decker, III, Judge.

More information

BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL

BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2016] NZREADT 78 READT 042/16 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND An application to review a decision of the Registrar pursuant to section 112 of the Real

More information

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT DENTON ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D14-4270 [January 4, 2017] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

More information

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr M.E SETUMU COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : ADV. NONTENJWA

COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr M.E SETUMU COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : ADV. NONTENJWA . Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Magistrates: Circulate to Regional Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v McPherson [2002] QCA 401 PARTIES: R v McPHERSON, Terri Ann (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 118 of 2002 DC No 39 of 2002 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA. (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A., And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA. (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A., And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA [CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A MROSSO, JA; RUTAKANGWA, J.A] CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 151 OF 2005 NGASA MADINA APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.. RESPONDENT (Appeal from the High

More information

NO CR CR CR CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B

NO CR CR CR CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B NO. 07-05-0300-CR 07-05-0301-CR 07-05-0302-CR 07-05-0303-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B JUNE 12, 2007 JOSE GEORGE GONZALES, JR., APPELLANT V. THE STATE

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY. Court of Appeals No. WM Appellee Trial Court No. [Cite as State v. Robbins, 2012-Ohio-3862.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT WILLIAMS COUNTY State of Ohio Court of Appeals No. WM-11-012 Appellee Trial Court No. 10 CR 103 v. Barry

More information

Sentence adjudged 1 April 2015 by GCM convened at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, United Kingdom. Military Judge: Christopher F. Leavey (sitting alone).

Sentence adjudged 1 April 2015 by GCM convened at Royal Air Force Mildenhall, United Kingdom. Military Judge: Christopher F. Leavey (sitting alone). UNITED STATES AIR FORCE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS UNITED STATES v. Master Sergeant MICHAEL S. INGRAM United States Air Force ACM 38849 8 November 2016 Sentence adjudged 1 April 2015 by GCM convened at

More information

STATE OF OHIO LAVELLE COLEMAN

STATE OF OHIO LAVELLE COLEMAN [Cite as State v. Coleman, 2008-Ohio-2806.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 89358 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. LAVELLE COLEMAN

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA. (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A., And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA. (CORAM: LUBUVA, J.A., MROSO, J.A., And RUTAKANGWA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MWANZA (CORAM: LUBUVA J.A, MROSO, J.A, RUTAKANGWA) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 95 OF 2005 RASHID SEBA. APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC.. RESPONDENT (Appeal from the judgment of

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS RUSSELL TERRY McELVAIN, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee. No. 08-11-00170-CR Appeal from the Criminal District Court Number Two of Tarrant

More information

SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO.

SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO. THE PEOPLE (1982) Z.R. 115 (S.C.) SUPREME COURT NGULUBE, D.C.J., GARDNER AND MUWO, J.J.S. 14TH SEPTEMBER AND 5TH OCTOBER,1982 (S.C.Z. JUDGMENT NO.28 OF 1982) APPEAL NO.72 OF 1982 Flynote Criminal law and

More information

United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals

United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals United States Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals UNITED STATES Appellee v. Randy A. LOPEZ Staff Sergeant (E-6), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant No. 201700252 Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine

More information

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT

REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA NOT REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA MAIN DIVISION, WINDHOEK APPEAL JUDGMENT Case no: CA 123/2016 SAUL MBAISA APPELLANT versus THE STATE RESPONDENT Neutral citation: Mbaisa v S (CA

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Mag. Appeal No. 13 of 2011 BETWEEN DAVENDRA OUJAR Appellant AND P.C. DANRAJ ROOPAN #15253 Respondent PANEL: P. WEEKES, J A R. NARINE, J A Appearances: Mr. Jagdeo

More information

S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. evidence was presented to support a finding of guilt. For the reasons that

S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. evidence was presented to support a finding of guilt. For the reasons that In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 4, 2019 S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. BENHAM, Justice. In February 2015, Appellant Larry Stanford was convicted of two counts of malice murder in connection

More information

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN TSHEDISO NICHOLAS NTSASA. VAN DER MERWE, J et MBHELE, AJ

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN TSHEDISO NICHOLAS NTSASA. VAN DER MERWE, J et MBHELE, AJ SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION,

More information

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N

COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS O P I N I O N COURT OF APPEALS EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS EL PASO, TEXAS ROBERTO SILVAS, v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant, Appellee. No. 08-14-00147-CR Appeal from the 120th District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC#

More information