SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY COURT OF APPEAL
Case Title:
Baker v The Queen
Citation:
[2020] ACTCA 55
Hearing Date:
3 November 2020
DecisionDate:
25 November 2020
Reasons Date:
25 November 2020
Before:
Mossop, Loukas-Karlsson and Abraham JJ
Decision:
Appeal dismissed
Catchwords:
APPEAL – Conviction – whether trial judge erred in admitting the “four hits” evidence – whether the trial judge erred by not discharging the jury following the Crown’s opening – whether the trial judge erred by failing to give a Jones v Dunkel direction with respect to an anticipated Crown witness – whether the dates on the indictment were an essential feature of the offence – whether the verdict was unsafe – no error established – the verdict was open to the jury on the evidence – appeal dismissed.
The appellant was charged on indictment with eleven offences relating to the importation and trafficking of a variety of illegal drugs and two offences concerning dealings in money that was the proceeds of crime.
The offences were…
Grounds of appeal
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Baker v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Baker v The Queen [2020] ACTCA 55
Case
[2020] ACTCA 55
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Baker v The Queen*, the Court of Appeal of Victoria considered an appeal against a conviction. The appellant, Baker, challenged the trial judge's decisions regarding the admission of certain evidence, the conduct of the trial, and the ultimate verdict.
The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence referred to as the "four hits" evidence, whether the jury should have been discharged following the Crown's opening address, whether a *Jones v Dunkel* direction was required concerning an anticipated Crown witness, and whether the dates specified in the indictment were an essential element of the offence. The Court also considered whether the verdict reached by the jury was unsafe.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the trial judge's rulings. It reasoned that the admission of the "four hits" evidence was permissible, that the Crown's opening did not necessitate a discharge of the jury, and that a *Jones v Dunkel* direction was not warranted in the circumstances. Furthermore, the Court determined that the dates on the indictment were not an essential feature of the offence as charged. Ultimately, the Court concluded that the verdict was open to the jury on the evidence presented at trial and was therefore not unsafe. The appeal was dismissed.