R v Tran [2010] VSC 560 is a decision of Hollingworth J presiding over a murder trial. The judgment concerns the admissibility of the selection of the accused's picture from an array of photographs shown to an eyewitness.Pitkin v R (1995) 80 A Crim R 302 is often quoted as authority for the proposition (amongst …
Continue reading R v Tran [2010] VSC 560: positive identification
Further Edit: Additional remarks, referring to Hudson and Hili, were made by the Court of Appeal in Russell v The Queen [2011] VSCA 147.Buchanan JA [beginning at 2]:A sentencing judge is required to have regard to, inter alia, current sentencing practices[1] and accordingly will take into account in the instinctive synthesis of relevant sentencing considerations …
Some think this notorious UK case was a victory for common sense. Others think it's further evidence of an overly-regulated society. You be the judge.In R v Ireland [1997] 3 WLR 534 the appellant had been convicted of three counts of assault causing actual bodily harm under the Offences against the Person Act 1861.Lord Steyn …
Back in June, Dr Manhattan discussed the Victorian Court of Appeal's recent decision on glassing sentences, Winch v The Queen [2010] VSCA 141.In simple terms, the Court held that 'glassing' will typically result in a jail sentence.That case — and many others — was recently considered by the West Australian Court of Appeal in Powell …
Continue reading Powell v Tickner [2010] WASCA 224: community standards and sentences for glassing