Cheney v The Queen

Cheney (the applicant) appealed to the High Court of Australia against his conviction for murder. The applicant had been convicted in the Supreme Court of Queensland following a trial by jury. The central issue on appeal concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained from the applicant during police interviews.

The High Court was required to determine whether the evidence obtained from the applicant during the police interviews was admissible, specifically in light of the applicant's mental state at the time of the interviews and the circumstances under which the interviews were conducted. This involved considering the principles governing the admissibility of confessional evidence, particularly where there are concerns about voluntariness or fairness.

The Court considered the common law principles relating to the admissibility of confessions, including the requirement that a confession must be voluntary. Gleeson CJ and Callinan J noted that while the applicant may have been experiencing distress, this did not automatically render his statements involuntary or inadmissible. The Court examined the evidence presented at trial regarding the interviews and concluded that there was no basis to interfere with the trial judge's decision to admit the evidence. The applicant's mental state, while a relevant consideration, did not, in the circumstances, render the confession inadmissible.

The appeal was dismissed.