WALKER CRIMINAL LAWYERS
If you are unhappy with the result of a court matter at first instance, you can sometimes appeal it to a higher court for a variety of reasons including that the penalty was too severe or the finding of guilt was unjustified due to an error of law or an erroneous finding of fact.
My client was convicted and sentenced to a Community Corrections Order arising from an incident where my client kicked a scooter rider off their scooter resulting in a dislocated shoulder.
Upon appeal, submissions were made to the learned Judge regarding the provocation caused by the victim and the steps that my client had taken post the offending behaviour. Despite the prosecution not concurring with a conviction not being recorded, the Judge ordered that my client be sentenced to a conditional release order without conviction pursuant to the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).
This was a great result for my client who can maintain his good character in the community without a criminal conviction.
View this post on Instagram
My client was sentenced a term of full-time imprisonment in the Local Court. I represented my client on appeal in the District Court.
Prior to conducting the appeal, I advised my client on evidence which may assist the District Court in determining a sentence. During the appeal, submissions were made concerning an appropriate sentence noting the objective seriousness of the offence and ultimately what would benefit the community and my client when regard is given to the purposes of criminal sentencing.
Despite the prosecution suggesting that a term of imprisonment was warranted in the circumstances, His Honour was of the view that my client should be sentenced to a community based order. This meant that the original sentence of imprisonment was set aside and a new community based sentence was ordered.
This was a great result for my client who can now continue his rehabilitative efforts whilst maintaining his liberty in the community.
View this post on Instagram
My client originally received a conviction during Local Court sentencing arising from a domestic violence incident.
I represented my client upon appeal. Submissions were made to Her Honour in the appeal concerning the events and surrounding circumstances which contributed to the behaviour at the time of the offending as well as the actions my client had taken post the offending conduct. Despite the prosecution submitting that a criminal record/conviction was warranted in the circumstances, Her Honour was satisfied that my client should be afforded an outcome which did not include a conviction/criminal record.
This was a great result for my client who can continue with his life criminal record fee.
My client was convicted of a number of counts of sexual touching without consent after a defended Local Court Hearing. My client approached me and sought advice.
Upon an appeal of the finding of guilt, submissions were made concerning the onus and burden of proof which is carried by the Crown in a criminal proceeding.
Detailed consideration was given to the unchallenged evidence in the Local Court and the bearing that had on the assessment of the evidence. Reference was made to the High Court Cases of Liberato (Liberato v The Queen (1985) 159 CLR 507) and De Silva (De Silva v The Queen  HCA 48) which reiterated how a judicial officer should assess competing evidence.
Ultimately His Honour was not satisfied that the Crown had discharged the heavy burden of satisfying the court beyond a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was upheld and the charges were dismissed.
My client was charged with assault occassioing actual bodily violence (domestic violence) and damaging property (domestic violence). In the Local Court, my client received a conviction.
After approaching me and following advice, my client embarked on a severity appeal in the District Court for the purposes of making a mental health diversion application.
During submissions to Her Honour, arguments surrounding why the public interest would be served if my client was diverted from the criminal justice system were ventilated. Her Honour was ultimately satisfied that my client would be a suitable vehicle for diversion and that to be dealt with at law would not be in the public interest. As such, Her Honour granted the application pursuant to section 14 Mental Health And Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW).
This was a great result for my client who was able to leave court without a conviction as a result of this criminal offending.
My client was charged with a number of driving whilst disqualified offences which resulted in him obtaining a full-time custodial sentence in the Local Court for his blatant repeated disregard for the law.
During a severity appeal, submissions were made to Her Honour regarding the rehabilitative steps my client could take if he was out of custody in an effort not to reoffend. Submissions were made as to how this could benefit the community and the offender with the ultimate aim of lowering recidivism. Her Honour agreed and noting the time already served in custody, ordered that my client be released on an Intensive Corrections Order, which is a form of a suspended jail sentence.
A great result for my client who can now work on his rehabilitative efforts in an effort not to reoffend.
My client was found guilty of six counts of sexual intercourse without consent (aka. rape) and 1 count of intentional choking. Given the seriousness of the charges, a jail sentence was highly likely.
Upon sentencing, submissions were provided to the learned Magistrate regarding the prospects of rehabilitation and the unlikelihood that my client would reoffend. My client was ultimately sentenced to a non-parole period of 2 months in a correctional institution.
I lodged an appeal concerning the finding of guilt and made a bail application for my client to be released pending the determination of the appeal which was granted.
After the appeal was lodged, the Director of Public Prosecutions lodged an appeal against the leniency of the sentence imposed upon my client.
During the appeal, submissions were made concerning the relationship that developed between the complainant and the accused leading up to the incident as well as the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s evidence inter alia.
On appeal, His Honour was ultimately not satisfied that my client was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and dismissed all charges. This meant that the Director of Public Prosecution’s appeal against the leniency of the sentence need not be considered as my client was found not guilty.
This was a great result for my client who had already been sentenced to a period of incarceration with the possibility of a longer sentence being imposed, having his name cleared and being found not guilty of all charges.
My client was charged with affray arising out of an inner city physical dispute at a bar. Affray is a relatively serious charge which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. After receiving a conviction/criminal record in the Local Court, my client followed advice and appealed to the District Court and sought to be diverted under a section 14 of the Mental Health And Cognitive Impairment Provisions Act 2020 (NSW) legislation.
During an extensive appeal in the District Court, various submissions were made concerning the causal connection between my client’s mental health ailments and the offending. Ultimately despite the prosecution opposing the diversionary application, His Honour was satisfied that my client was suitable for a mental health diversion and as such granted our application. This was a great result for my client who can now maintain his criminal free record and obtain the professional assistance with his mental health that he requires.
View this post on Instagram
My client was charged as a co-offender in a joint criminal enterprise resulting in the assault of a female which left the victim naked.
My client was sentenced to a term of full time custody as a result of his part in the assault. Following legal advice, my client lodged a severity appeal and was released on appeals bail following a successful release application at Central Local Court.
On appeal in the Downing Centre District Court, submissions were made concerning legal technical aspects relating to the culpability of an offender in a joint criminal enterprise. Further submissions were made concerning my client’s history, and his rehabilitative efforts since the offence.
Despite my client having a lengthy criminal history, His Honour was persuaded that my client’s penalty should be served in the community rather than in full-time custody.
This was a great result for my client who was originally sentenced to 12 months imprisonment but was now able to serve his sentence within the community.
My client was a professional in a promising career who found himself charged with stalk or intimidate intending to cause fear or physical harm after an altercation with his partner which resulted in neighbours calling the police.
During the argument between my client and his partner, my client struck his partner with his car at low speed resulting in his partner falling over. My client was convicted in the Local Court which put his career in jeopardy.
My client sought my representation for an appeal to the District Court. A subjective case was prepared and I made submissions to the learned Judge as to why my client should not have a conviction recorded for this offence. The prosecution were opposed to this approach and submitted that a conviction should be recorded given that it was not a trivial offence and that it was a domestic violence offence. Thankfully the case of Regina v Paris in 2001 from the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal was brought to the Judge’s attention which provided that a Judge could decide to not record a conviction even if the Judge did not regard the offence as trivial. Based on this and the other factors contained in section 10, the learned Judge was of the view that a conviction should not be recorded against my client. As such, His Honour decided to not record a conviction.
This was a terrific result for my client who’s professional career is now not in jeopardy.
My client was charged with 13 domestic violence charges including assault occasioning actual bodily harm, stalk/intimidate and common assault. My client plead not guilty but was found guilty by the learned Local Court Magistrate.
Following advice, my client appealed to the District Court and made a mental health diversion application. Submissions were provided to the learned District Court Judge regarding why the law allowed my client to be dealt with in this manner, why my client should not be made an example of to the community, and why the community would benefit from my client being diverted away from the criminal justice system. Following a long deliberation, His Honour was of the view that the community would benefit if my client was diverted away from the criminal justice system and dealt with under Mental Health legislation. This meant that the 13 charges against my client were dismissed, meaning no criminal penalty and no criminal record.
This was a great result for my client who was initially facing jail time after being found guilty of 13 charges.
My client was found guilty in a Local Court Hearing of Sexual Touching without consent at Parramatta Local Court.
My client was a respectable member of the community and this conviction meant that he would lose his career and livelihood.
Following advice, my client appealed the matter to the Parramatta District Court. During the Parramatta District Court Hearing, evidence that demonstrated inconsistencies in the complainant’s account and evidence that questioned the complainant’s motivations to make the complaint were analysed in detail. Submissions were than made to His Honour as to why the finding of guilty was unsafe based on those inconsistencies. Ultimately His Honour was not satisfied that a finding beyond reasonable doubt of guilt was suitable on this evidence and the finding of guilt in the Local Court was overturned.
A great result for my client who can now get on with his life and career.
My Client was found guilty in the Local Court of a Stalk / Intimidate Domestic Violence charge and was convicted with a fine.
This presented a great problem for my client as a Domestic Violence conviction would cause a lot of issues for his future promotion and job opportunities.
Following advice, my client appealed the severity of the sentence to the District Court. At the District Court Hearing, submissions were provided to His Honour that the offending was at the lower end of objective seriousness. Some context which lead to the offending was highlighted to His Honour as well as why the purposes of criminal sentencing would be satisfied by the imposition of a non-conviction based court order. Ultimately His Honour was satisfied that the appropriate disposition would be that of not recording a conviction.
A great result for my client who can now continue his career plans and future travel plans without having a criminal conviction contained in his criminal record.
After a day out at the races which included winning some money, my client hopped into an Uber. My Client could not locate the money that she had won, and accused the Uber driver of stealing her money (this later turned out to be a false accusation). The Uber driver denied stealing my client’s money. My Client then assaulted the Uber driver nearly causing him to have a car accident.
The Uber driver took my client to the police station where she was arrested for common assault. The Uber driver and his vehicle was searched for stolen money which turned up nothing.
During my client’s heavily intoxicated state, my client accused the police of stealing her money (this also turned out to be a false accusation).
During sentencing in the Local Court, my client was convicted. This had the potential to have grave ramifications on my client’s livelihood. Upon advice, my client appealed this decision to the District Court. In the District Court, we represented my client and made submissions concerning the proportionality of what a conviction would entail for my client, who outside of this offending was otherwise of good character. We also provided submissions as to the rehabilitative steps that my client had taken. Notwithstanding this though, His Honour had to consider other aspects of the sentencing synthesis including the need for general deterrence and the objective seriousness of this offence which was relatively high. Ultimately though, His Honour was satisfied based on our submissions that my client should be provided a further opportunity to maintain her good character, and His Honour decided that the appeal from the Local Court should be allowed, with no conviction recorded. A great result for my client who can now continue with her employment without the risk of losing her job because of a criminal record.
On a drunken night out, my client thought it would be fun to enter a construction site and climb a construction crane. Site security noticed my client sitting on top of the crane and called police. Police Rescue attended and had to climb to the top of the crane to get my client back down.
My Client was subsequently charged with risking the safety of another by climbing building/structure and entering prescribed premises without lawful excuse.
In the Local Court, my client received a conviction and a monetary penalty for the offences. This criminal conviction presented problems for my client in applying for jobs. It was a mistake he deeply regretted with hindsight. We advised my client to lodge a severity appeal to the District Court.
In the District Court, we represented my client and provided submissions to Her Honour which persuaded Her Honour to allow the appeal, overturn the convictions and place my client on a non-conviction based order without any monetary penalty. This was a good result for my client.
My Client had a conviction recorded in the Local Court following an incident which occurred in December 2019. My Client was out at a hotel in Bondi when he organised to purchase 1g of Cocaine from a mobile drug supplier. A car pulled up, my client entered the car, purchased the drug, exited the vehicle, and then proceeded back to a hotel in Bondi.
Before walking back to the hotel, undercover police stopped and detained my client on suspicion of a drug transaction taking place. My Client was arrested. The police tried to stop my client using his phone to which he resisted. My Client was then handcuffed. The police searched my client and located 1g of Cocaine.
On advice, my client appealed the conviction recorded in the Local Court to the District Court. At the District Court Hearing, evidence of remorse, contrition and of prior good character was tendered to the Judge. Despite the decision of the learned Magistrate in the Local Court to record a conviction, the Judge was of the view that the purposes of sentencing could be achieved in this matter by not recording a conviction. The Local Court decision was set aside and my client received no conviction for the drug possession charge. A great result for my client which allowed him to leave Court and get on with his life without a criminal history.
During a family gathering over Christmas, my client got into a heated argument with his pregnant partner which involved shouting, screaming, swearing and kicking objects. The neighbour called the police and alleged that my client punched his pregnant partner which “sent her flying”. My Client plead not guilty to the charge in the Local Court, but was found guilty by the learned Local Court Magistrate, placed on a supervised community corrections order and fined $2,500.
Because of this my client approached our firm wanting to see what his options were. We advised him to embark on a District Court Conviction “all grounds” Appeal. During the Appeal Hearing, we sought the Court’s leave (which means the Court’s permission) to introduce new evidence, which was granted. We introduced new evidence which supported my client’s innocence and then proceeded to make extensive submissions concerning the standard of beyond reasonable doubt, what that entails, its genesis from the English legal system and English cases such as Woolmington v DPP  AC 462. His Honour said that he had very grave suspicions that my client was guilty but that he was bound to find my client not guilty due to the requisite standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” not being met. This was a good result for my client who did not have to pay the $2,500 fine, was not subject to supervision by Community Corrections and can firmly be regarded as “not guilty” of the charges.
ABOUT WALKER CRIMINAL LAWYERS
Obtain the most qualified legal representation
In order to minimise the disruption to your freedom, your financial position, your future career and travel prospects, be represented by Sydney Walker Criminal Lawyers to ensure that you get the best result.