Read the full judgment text of CACC 000268/1994 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment was delivered on 24 March 1995 before Yang CJ, Macdougall VP, Penlington JA.
Criminal law – robbery – application for leave to appeal against conviction – sufficiency of evidence – adequacy of jury directions on police evidence and alleged collusion between police witnesses – application for leave to appeal against sentence – robbery of Parafortune Fur Company on 7 April 1993 yielding cash and 13 boxes of very valuable mink fur – 1st applicant as driver and owner of the getaway van – presence of 1st applicant at the scene and his pursuit, apprehension, verbal statement and cautioned written statement – palm print of 2nd applicant found on the truck – presence of 2nd applicant in the general area – whether 1st applicant's conviction was safe and satisfactory – whether jury directions on alleged collusion between police constables in preparing notebook records were sufficient – whether sentence of 8 years' imprisonment was excessive – court held the evidence against the 1st accused was very strong and the conviction was perfectly safe and satisfactory – court considered the directions given were adequate, applying R. v. Wong Wai-ming (Magistracy Appeal No. 1361 of 1989) and finding the jury must have been satisfied that the verbal statements were made and were voluntary – court held the sentence was not excessive in the circumstances – both applications for leave to appeal against conviction refused – 1st applicant's application for leave to appeal against sentence also refused.
Legal issues: Safety of 1st applicant's conviction · Adequacy of jury directions on alleged police collusion · Whether 8-year sentence was excessive
Outcome: Both applications for leave to appeal against conviction refused; 1st applicant's application for leave to appeal against sentence of 8 years' imprisonment also refused.