Morgan v R (No 2)

The case of Morgan v R (No 2) involved the appellant, Morgan, who was appealing against his conviction and sentence. The appeal focused on the issue of whether the "one indictment, one jury" rule applied and if the appeal could be abandoned in respect of certain counts on the indictment. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining these legal issues. The primary legal issues revolved around the proper application of the "one indictment, one jury" rule and the jurisdiction of the court to hear an appeal from an indictment containing multiple counts. Additionally, the court had to consider whether an appeal in respect of certain counts on the indictment could be abandoned.

The court examined the principles underpinning the "one indictment, one jury" rule and whether it applied in the context of this appeal. The court found that the rule did not necessarily preclude an appeal from an indictment containing multiple counts, provided that the appeal was not abandoned in respect of any counts. Furthermore, the court held that the abandonment of an appeal in respect of certain counts on the indictment did not affect the court's jurisdiction to hear the appeal in respect of the remaining counts. The court concluded that the appeal was validly before it and that it had the jurisdiction to hear it.

The High Court determined that the appeal was validly before it and that the "one indictment, one jury" rule did not preclude the appeal from an indictment containing multiple counts. The court found that the appeal could proceed in respect of the counts not abandoned by the appellant. The court further held that the abandonment of certain counts did not affect the court's jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The appeal was thus allowed in respect of the counts not abandoned by the appellant.