Anderson v The Queen

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant, Mr Anderson, sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of South Australia. The dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence and the onus of proof in relation to sentencing for a cannabis cultivation offence.

The legal issues before the High Court were twofold. Firstly, whether evidence given by a detective, which was based partly on hearsay and partly on limited experience, was admissible on the issue of the purpose for which cannabis was cultivated. This issue also involved the interpretation of section 6 of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA). Secondly, the applicant argued that the Court of Criminal Appeal failed to independently assess the evidence and effectively reversed the onus of proof, asserting that the Crown bore the onus of proving a commercial purpose for the cultivation.

The applicant's primary submission was that the Crown bore the onus of proving a commercial purpose for the cannabis cultivation, as there was nothing in the relevant legislation to reverse the normal onus of proof, which generally rests on the Crown to prove aggravating circumstances. The applicant contended that the Court of Criminal Appeal had erred in its assessment of this onus. The Court noted that the applicant had not relied on section 32(6) of the relevant Act before the sentencing judge, which would have placed the onus on the applicant to establish that the cultivation was solely for personal consumption.