Chan v The Queen

Chan appealed his conviction for armed robbery from the Supreme Court of New South Wales to the High Court of Australia. The appeal concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from the appellant's mobile phone.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence derived from the appellant's mobile phone, which was seized pursuant to a search warrant, was admissible at trial. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the search warrant was validly issued and, if not, whether the evidence obtained was nonetheless admissible under the proviso to section 13(1) of the *Crimes (Appeal and Regulation) Act 1971* (NSW) (now repealed).

Callinan and Heydon JJ held that the search warrant was invalid because it did not specify the offence for which the search was authorised with sufficient particularity. However, their Honours found that the evidence obtained from the mobile phone was admissible under the proviso, as it was overwhelmingly probable that the jury would have convicted the appellant even if the evidence had not been admitted. The Court reasoned that the other evidence against the appellant was so strong that the admission of the mobile phone evidence did not occasion a miscarriage of justice.

The appeal was dismissed.