Day v The King

The appeal concerned the admission of certain evidence at the trial of the appellant, who was charged with drug trafficking. The defence had argued that another individual, Roman Melis, could have been in possession of the drugs, a possibility the jury ultimately rejected. The central dispute revolved around whether evidence of cash, a spoon, and scales was improperly admitted as discreditable conduct evidence under section 34P(2)(b) of the Evidence Act, which requires such evidence to have "strong probative value" when relied upon for a propensity or disposition.

The legal issues before the court were whether the admission of the evidence of cash, a spoon, and scales constituted a miscarriage of justice. Specifically, the court had to determine if this evidence, when used to establish a propensity or disposition of the appellant towards drug trafficking, possessed the requisite "strong probative value" under section 34P(2)(b) of the Evidence Act, and if its admission prejudiced the appellant unfairly.

The court reasoned that evidence of an individual conducting the business of drug trafficking, as reviewed in *R v Soteriou*, can demonstrate an inclination or propensity to possess drugs for trade. Furthermore, drawing on *R v Falzon*, the court acknowledged that evidence of cash found at a premises, in conjunction with other indicators of drug trafficking, can support an inference that the individual was engaged in the business of trafficking. The High Court in *Falzon* held that cash likely derived from previous sales fortified the probability of regular sales and the ongoing nature of a trafficking business. The court found that the evidence of cash, spoon, and scales was admissible as it had strong probative value in establishing the appellant's involvement in drug trafficking.

Permission to appeal was granted, but the appeal itself was dismissed.