Mikael v Regina [2015] NSWCCA 294

Mikael v Regina [2015] NSWCCA 294

The trial judge did not err in refusing to discharge the jury because the phone flash incident was investigated, no photograph had been taken, the jury were given a full and effective explanation, they expressed no continuing concern when invited to do so, and transcripts of closing addresses addressed any potential...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From District Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'discharge of Jury' 'jury Impartiality' 'potential Prejudice From Courtroom Incident' 'judicial Directions to Jury']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'discharge of Jury' 'jury Impartiality' 'potential Prejudice From Courtroom Incident' 'judicial Directions to Jury']

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From District Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in failing to discharge the jury after jurors reported concern that a mobile phone flash may have been a photograph of them.' 'Whether the phone flash incident caused prejudice to the appellant or gave rise to a risk that the jury would not perform its duty impartially.' "Whether the trial judge's investigation, explanation and directions, and provision of transcript, were sufficient to address any potential distraction or concern."]

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge did not err in refusing to discharge the jury because the phone flash incident was investigated, no photograph had been taken, the jury were given a full and effective explanation, they expressed no continuing concern when invited to do so, and transcripts of closing addresses addressed any potential momentary distraction. There was no prejudice to the appellant and no risk that the jury would not perform its duty impartially.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.']