Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v JM

The Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court which had quashed a conviction entered against JM. The dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained by the Australian Federal Police during a search of JM's property, which was conducted pursuant to a search warrant issued under the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth). The conviction had been based, in part, on this evidence.

The High Court was required to determine whether the search warrant was validly issued, and consequently, whether the evidence obtained pursuant to it was admissible. Specifically, the Court considered whether the issuing officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the premises to be searched were being used for the commission of a federal offence, as required by s 3E(1) of the *Crimes Act 1914*. The central question was whether the information presented to the issuing officer provided a sufficient factual basis for such a belief.

The High Court held that the issuing officer had not been provided with sufficient information to form a reasonable belief that the premises were being used for the commission of a federal offence. The information before the issuing officer was largely based on hearsay and speculation, lacking the necessary particularity to establish a direct or reasonably inferable connection between the premises and the alleged criminal activity. The Court reiterated the principle that a search warrant is a significant intrusion on privacy and liberty, and its issuance must be based on demonstrable grounds, not mere suspicion. Consequently, the evidence obtained was unlawfully obtained, and the conviction, which relied on that evidence, could not stand. The appeal was dismissed.