MULE -v- THE QUEEN [2004] WASCA 7
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2004] WASCA 7 | |
| COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL | |||
| Case No: | CCA:77/2003 | 4 DECEMBER 2003 | |
| Coram: | TEMPLEMAN J WHEELER J MCLURE J | 22/01/04 | |
| 13 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal dismissed | ||
| A | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | PELLEGRINO PAUL MULE THE QUEEN |
Catchwords: | Criminal law and procedure Appeal against conviction Directions at trial as to weight jury give to exculpatory statements on video interview Whether right to remain silent at trial undermined in summing up Whether direction or comment by trial Judge |
Legislation: | Nil |
Case References: | Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50 Jack v Smail (1905) 2 CLR 684 R v Aziz [1996] AC 41 R v Cox [1986] 2 Qd R 55 R v Duncan (1981) 73 Cr App R 359 R v Sharp [1988] 1 WLR 7. , RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620 Spence v Demasi (1988) 48 SASR 538 Weissensteiner v The Queen (1993) 178 CLR 217 Petty v Maiden v The Queen (1991) 173 CLR 95 R v Ellis, unreported; CCA Supreme Court of SA; Library No 485/97; 20 March 1998 Thompson v The Queen [1999] WASCA 266 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : MULE -v- THE QUEEN [2004] WASCA 7 CORAM : TEMPLEMAN J
- WHEELER J
MCLURE J
- Appellant
AND
THE QUEEN
Respondent
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Appeal against conviction - Directions at trial as to weight jury give to exculpatory statements on video interview - Whether right to remain silent at trial undermined in summing up - Whether direction or comment by trial Judge
Legislation:
Nil
Result:
Appeal dismissed
(Page 2)
Category: A
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : Mr D Grace QC & Mr L M Levy
Respondent : Mr R E Cock QC
Solicitors:
Appellant : Laurie Levy & Associates
Respondent : State Director of Public Prosecutions
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Azzopardi v The Queen (2001) 205 CLR 50
Jack v Smail (1905) 2 CLR 684
R v Aziz [1996] AC 41
R v Cox [1986] 2 Qd R 55
R v Duncan (1981) 73 Cr App R 359
R v Sharp [1988] 1 WLR 7. ,
RPS v The Queen (2000) 199 CLR 620
Spence v Demasi (1988) 48 SASR 538
Weissensteiner v The Queen (1993) 178 CLR 217
Case(s) also cited:
Petty v Maiden v The Queen (1991) 173 CLR 95
R v Ellis, unreported; CCA Supreme Court of SA; Library No 485/97; 20 March 1998
Thompson v The Queen [1999] WASCA 266
(Page 3)
1 TEMPLEMAN J: The appellant was convicted after trial by Judge and jury in the District Court on an indictment containing a single count: that the appellant had in his possession a prohibited drug,…
Continue reading Mule v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Mule v The Queen [2004] WASCA 7
- Case
- [2004] WASCA 7
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia. The appellant, Mule, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The nature of the dispute was whether certain directions and comments made by the trial judge during the summing up of the case were sufficient to undermine the appellant's right to remain silent. The appeal was against the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial judge. The central legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge's directions regarding the weight to be given to exculpatory statements made by the appellant in a video interview were appropriate and whether any comments made by the trial judge during the summing up of the case had the effect of undermining the appellant's right to remain silent. The court considered the relevant legal principles and authorities on the issue of the right to remain silent and the effect of comments made by a trial judge during the summing up of a case. The court found that the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding the weight to be given to the exculpatory statements made by the appellant in the video interview were appropriate and did not undermine the appellant's right to remain silent. The court also found that none of the comments made by the trial judge during the summing up of the case had the effect of undermining the appellant's right to remain silent. The court concluded that the trial was conducted fairly and that there was no miscarriage of justice. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial judge were upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.