Cheney v the Queen S286/2000

Cheney appealed to the High Court of Australia against his conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained from the appellant, specifically a confession made to police.

The High Court was required to determine whether the confession was improperly or unfairly obtained, and if so, whether it should have been excluded from evidence under the common law. This involved considering the principles governing the admissibility of confessions, particularly in circumstances where an accused person has been subjected to questioning by police.

The Court affirmed the principle that a confession is inadmissible if it was obtained by means of an unfair or improper question or by the unfair admission of evidence. Gleeson CJ and Callinan J noted that the common law has a discretion to exclude evidence if its prejudicial effect outweighs its probative value, or if it was obtained unfairly. In this instance, the Court found that the confession was not unfairly obtained, and therefore, it was properly admitted into evidence. The appeal was dismissed.