R v Millar (No 2)

The appeal was brought by the appellant, Millar, against his conviction and sentence. The case before the court involved a detailed examination of the circumstances surrounding the trial to determine if there were any errors that amounted to a miscarriage of justice. The court was tasked with considering several grounds of appeal including irregularities related to the jury, the improper admission or rejection of evidence, and misdirection or non-direction by the trial judge. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the appellant's trial was tainted by irregularities that resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Specifically, the court had to consider if the appellant's legal representatives being seen by the jury without him could have led to an assumption that he was in custody. Another issue was whether the trial judge should have discharged the jury after they saw a corrective services officer handling handcuffs and keys, which might have suggested the appellant was in custody. The court also needed to determine if the admission of evidence regarding the appellant's gambling habits and an unidentified document handed to him during cross-examination prejudiced the trial. Finally, the court examined if the concurrent delivery of a Black direction and a majority verdict direction amounted to a misdirection.

The court found that none of the issues raised by the appellant amounted to a miscarriage of justice. Regarding the possibility that jurors could have inferred the appellant was in custody, the court held that the appellant had not demonstrated that this inference was likely or that it affected the outcome of the trial. The court also determined that the trial judge’s directions to the jury adequately addressed any potential prejudice from the evidence regarding gambling habits and the unidentified document. Furthermore, the court concluded that the simultaneous delivery of the Black direction and the majority verdict direction did not undermine the Black direction. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the conviction and sentence was dismissed. The court did not find any grounds to set aside the conviction or order a new trial.