Miles v R

Miles was convicted and sentenced to a lengthy prison term for various offences, including robbery and false imprisonment. He now appeals against his conviction on several grounds, one of which is that the trial judge improperly directed the jury in relation to his complaints about the police investigation. Miles also claims that evidence of flight should have been admitted at first instance, and that the trial judge erred in his directions regarding this evidence. The appeal was heard by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal.

The court had to determine whether the trial judge's directions in relation to Miles' complaint about the police investigation violated the principle established in Palmer v The Queen. The court also had to consider whether evidence of flight should have been admitted at first instance, and whether the trial judge erred in his directions regarding this evidence. The court considered these issues in light of the principles established by the High Court in Lee v The Queen, and the proviso in the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) s 6.

The court held that the trial judge's directions in relation to Miles' complaint about the police investigation did not violate the principle in Palmer v The Queen. The court also held that evidence of flight should not have been admitted at first instance, but that the trial judge's directions regarding this evidence were not erroneous. The court held that the application for leave to appeal was incompetent because it was brought years after the conviction was entered, and because there was no reasonable prospect of success on the grounds of appeal. The appeal was dismissed.

The court made no orders as to costs.