QLDQCA
R v Ping [2005] QCA 472
[2005] QCA 472
Court of Appeal (Qld)|2005-12-16|Before: Williams and Jerrard JJA and Chesterman JSeparate, reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the, orders made
View original sourceAt a glance
Source factsCourt
Court of Appeal (Qld)
Decision date
2005-12-16
Before
Williams and Jerrard JJA and Chesterman JSeparate, reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the, orders made
Catchwords
- CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – VERDICT
- – OTHER MATTERS – where the applicant/appellant
- was convicted on one
- count of torture and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment –
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – VERDICT– OTHER MATTERS – where the applicant/appellantwas convicted on onecount of torture and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment –whether the evidence was capable ofproving the applicant/appellant intended toinflict severe pain and sufferingwhether the trial judge erred in summing upto thejuryCRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE –JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKENINTOACCOUNT – FACTUAL BASIS FOR SENTENCE – PROOF AND EVIDENCE –GENERALLY – whether the trial judge erredin admitting the evidence of anexpert witness or did not properly direct the jury with respect to that expertevidence Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) s 16, s 17, s320AGordon v R (1982) 41 ALR 64, citedMakita (Australia)Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305(2001) 52 NSWLR 705, discussedR v Burns [2000] QCA 201