Carr v The Queen [1973] HCA 37

Carr v The Queen [1973] HCA 37

The taking and use of the applicant's fingerprints was lawful under s. 353A of the Crimes Act N.S.W. and with the applicant's agreement; therefore, their admission was proper and no ground existed to exclude them in the judge's discretion.

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal
Outcome
special leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Fingerprint Evidence' 'lawfulness of Evidence Collection' 'judicial Discretion in Evidence Exclusion']
['criminal Law'] ['admissibility of Fingerprint Evidence' 'lawfulness of Evidence Collection' 'judicial Discretion in Evidence Exclusion']

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 / Application for Special Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant's fingerprints were lawfully taken and admissible as evidence" 'Whether the trial judge had discretion to exclude the fingerprint evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

The taking and use of the applicant's fingerprints was lawful under s. 353A of the Crimes Act N.S.W. and with the applicant's agreement; therefore, their admission was proper and no ground existed to exclude them in the judge's discretion.

Court Disposition

special leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Special leave to appeal refused.']