Banks v The Queen

Banks appealed his conviction for murder to the High Court of Australia. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from Banks's body, specifically blood and urine samples, which were taken without his consent. The prosecution argued that the samples were lawfully obtained under s 354 of the *Criminal Code* (Qld) and that their admission did not occasion a miscarriage of justice.

The High Court was required to determine whether the blood and urine samples were obtained in accordance with the requirements of s 354 of the *Criminal Code* (Qld), and if not, whether their admission into evidence at trial resulted in a miscarriage of justice. This involved an examination of the scope of the power to take samples under s 354 and the principles governing the admission of improperly obtained evidence.

Hayne and Callinan JJ held that the taking of the blood and urine samples was not authorised by s 354 of the *Criminal Code* (Qld). Their Honours reasoned that the section required the person to be in lawful custody, which Banks was not at the time the samples were taken. Furthermore, even if the taking of the samples was unlawful, the court considered whether a miscarriage of justice had occurred. They concluded that the admission of the evidence, given its potential to influence the jury, did occasion a miscarriage of justice, and therefore the conviction could not stand.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.