Eric v The State of Western Australia

The appellant was convicted of six counts of possession of a prohibited drug with intent to sell or supply. The appellant appealed against his conviction on the basis that the trial judge erred in discharging a juror during the jury's deliberations. The juror in question refused to return to the jury room. The appellant argued that the trial judge did not make adequate enquiries about the internal issue concerning the jury and that the trial judge should have discharged the entire jury. The appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Western Australia, which held that the trial judge did not err in discharging the juror, and that the appellant had not suffered a miscarriage of justice as a result of this decision.

The court considered the legal issues surrounding the discharge of a juror during deliberations and the adequacy of the trial judge's enquiries. The court held that the trial judge was entitled to discharge the juror if it was reasonable to do so in the circumstances. The court also held that the trial judge was not required to make exhaustive enquiries about the internal issue concerning the jury, as long as the trial judge made sufficient enquiries to enable the trial judge to form a reasonable view as to whether the juror could continue to serve on the jury. The court further held that the trial judge was not required to discharge the entire jury simply because one juror had been discharged, as long as the trial judge was satisfied that the remaining jurors were able to continue to serve on the jury.

The court found that the trial judge had made sufficient enquiries about the internal issue concerning the jury, and that the trial judge was entitled to discharge the juror in the circumstances. The court also found that the appellant had not suffered a miscarriage of justice as a result of the discharge of the juror, as the remaining jurors were able to continue to serve on the jury and the trial judge had taken reasonable steps to ensure that the appellant's right to a fair trial was not compromised. The court held that the appeal should be dismissed.

The Supreme Court of Western Australia dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction of the appellant on six counts of possession of a prohibited drug with intent to sell or supply. The court held that the trial judge did not err in discharging the juror, and that the appellant had not suffered a miscarriage of justice as a result of this decision. The court further held that the trial judge made sufficient enquiries about the internal issue concerning the jury, and that the trial judge was entitled to discharge the juror in the circumstances. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld.