Stevens v The Queen

Stevens appealed his conviction for murder to the High Court of Australia. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from a search of the appellant's property, which was conducted without a warrant. The appellant argued that the evidence was unlawfully obtained and should have been excluded by the trial judge.

The High Court was required to determine whether the search conducted by police was lawful under the relevant legislation, and if not, whether the evidence obtained should have been excluded under the common law or statutory provisions governing the admission of unlawfully obtained evidence. This involved considering the scope of police powers to search premises without a warrant and the principles governing the discretion to admit such evidence.

The Court examined the provisions of the *Crimes Act 1900* (NSW) and relevant common law principles concerning the admissibility of evidence. It was held that the search was unlawful as the police did not have reasonable grounds to believe that the appellant had committed or was about to commit a serious indictable offence, nor did they obtain the necessary consent or warrant. The Court then considered the discretion to admit unlawfully obtained evidence, applying the principle that such evidence should generally be excluded unless the probative value of the evidence outweighs the prejudice it would cause to the accused. In this instance, the Court found that the admission of the unlawfully obtained evidence had occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.