Smith v The Queen

This case concerned an appeal by the appellant, Smith, against his conviction for robbery. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of evidence provided by two police officers who identified the appellant in security camera photographs taken during the bank robbery. The appellant argued that this identification evidence was inadmissible. The matter was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the police officers' evidence, identifying the appellant in security camera photographs, was relevant under section 55 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW). If found to be relevant, the court also had to determine whether this evidence was inadmissible as opinion evidence under section 76 of the Act, or if it could be admitted under other exceptions. The court also considered whether the evidence was unfairly prejudicial.

The High Court reasoned that the police officers' evidence was relevant because it could rationally affect the jury's assessment of the probability that the appellant was one of the robbers. The court noted that the photographs often obscured the perpetrator's face, and the police witnesses had had repeated opportunities to observe the appellant in daylight and in motion, potentially placing them in a better position than the jury to make an identification. However, the court ultimately concluded that the evidence given by the police officers was evidence of opinion, not direct fact, and was therefore inadmissible under section 76 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW).

The appeals were allowed, the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales was set aside, and in its place, the appeals to that Court were allowed, with the conviction and sentence being quashed. A new trial was ordered.