D v The Queen

The case of *D v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appellant, D, had been convicted of a serious criminal offence and sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence during D's trial, specifically evidence obtained through a search of his property. D argued that the search was unlawful and that the evidence derived from it should have been excluded by the trial judge.

The High Court was required to determine whether the search conducted by police officers was lawful under the relevant legislation, and if not, whether the evidence obtained as a result of that search should have been excluded from the trial. This involved an examination of the powers of police to conduct searches and the circumstances under which evidence obtained in contravention of legal requirements may be admitted in criminal proceedings. The court also considered the principles governing the exercise of judicial discretion to admit such evidence.

In their joint judgment, Gummow and Hayne JJ analysed the provisions of the *Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000* (Qld) governing search warrants and the powers of police to enter and search premises. They found that the search in question was conducted without a valid warrant and that the circumstances did not justify the exercise of any exceptional powers of entry. Consequently, the search was unlawful. The court then applied the principles established in cases such as *Bally v The Queen* and *Ridgeway v The Queen*, which outline the discretion of a judge to exclude evidence obtained improperly or in contravention of the law. Their Honours concluded that the admission of the unlawfully obtained evidence had occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice, as it was highly prejudicial to the appellant and its admission was not justified by any overriding public interest.

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