Emery v The Queen

The case of *Emery v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the Court of Appeal of South Australia. The appellant, Emery, was appealing a District Court decision that admitted evidence obtained from a search of his vehicle and a subsequent record of interview. The evidence in question related to drug trafficking offences, specifically the possession of a significant quantity of methylamphetamine.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the search of the appellant's vehicle was lawful under section 52 of the *Controlled Substances Act 1984* (SA), and whether the appellant's rights under section 79A(3) of the *Summary Offences Act 1953* (SA) were adequately afforded to him during the process of his arrest and interview. The court was also required to consider whether, even if the search or the interview process had some irregularity, the evidence should have been excluded in the exercise of judicial discretion due to unfairness or improper obtaining.

The Court of Appeal held that the police officer possessed sufficient information to form the requisite suspicion for the search under section 52 of the *Controlled Substances Act*, rendering the search lawful. Regarding the interview, the court found that any delay in advising the appellant of his full rights under section 79A(3) of the *Summary Offences Act* was minimal and justifiable given the priority placed on a safety check. The court concluded that no error had been demonstrated in the trial judge's decision not to exclude the evidence from the search and the record of interview, noting the strong public interest in prosecuting serious drug offending and the absence of reckless or malicious conduct by the police.

Permission to appeal was granted on both grounds, but the appeal itself was dismissed. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge's decision to admit the evidence.