Tag: criminal law
-
In McDermott v The King (1948) 76 CLR 501, the High Court reaffirmed that voluntariness is the fundamental requirement for the admissibility of confessional evidence. The Court also confirmed that trial judges may exclude a confession where the circumstances in which it was obtained are unfair or improper. Additionally, the Court held that the English…
-
In Armitage v Parole Board Queensland (2023) 17 QR 297, the Court of Appeal reviewed the Parole Board’s decision to issue a ‘no cooperation declaration’ for a ‘no body-no parole prisoner’, where the victim’s remains were likely destroyed by fire or animal predation. One of the key issues was the meaning of “remains”.
-
In the matter of R v Lovell; Ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [2015] QCA 136, the Court of Appeal considered whether a disfigurement subsequently medically repaired is capable of amounting to ‘serious disfigurement’ under the definition of grievous bodily harm.
-
In Cobb v Queensland Police Service (2023) 3 QDCR 123, the Court considered whether a mobile phone constitutes a ‘computer’ for the purposes of s 408E of the Criminal Code and whether unauthorised access to a password-protected mobile phone amounted to misuse of a ‘restricted computer’.
-
In R v Morris [2010] QCA 315, the Court of Appeal considered whether the applicant’s sentence for unlawful stalking for posting defamatory notices—implicating the complainant as a murderer, was excessive.
-
In this special case Cherry v Queensland [2025] HCA 141, the High Court was questioned on the constitutional validity of Queensland’s ‘no body-no parole’ law. The plaintiff relied on the Kable principle, arguing that ss 175L and 175E of the Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld) invalid. The High Court determined s 175L of the Corrective…
-
In Stuart v The Queen (1974) 134 CLR 426, the High Court considered constructive murder (also known as felony murder), clarifying that conviction requires proof of an unlawful act endangering life, not intent to kill, leading to the refusal of Stuart’s application.
-
In Pearce v The Queen (1998) CLR 610, the defendant was indicted on two charges from a single incident. The High Court held there was no double prosecution, as each offence required proof of a different essential element, but the trial judge erred in sentencing.
-
In Kaporonovski v The Queen (1973) 133 CLR 209, the High Court upheld the Queensland Criminal Court of Appeal’s decision that the provocation defence under s 269 did not apply to s 320 (grievous bodily harm) of the Criminal Code (Qld).
-
In Royall v The Queen (1991) 172 CLR 378, the High Court upheld Royall’s murder conviction. Royall’s actions were the substantial or significant cause of the victim’s response of jumping to her death, maintaining the chain of causation.