Kozul v The Queen [1981] HCA 19

Kozul v The Queen [1981] HCA 19

Special leave was refused because, reading the summing up as a whole, the jury were fairly left to determine whether the Crown had proved that the revolver was discharged deliberately and not accidentally. The jury were entitled to examine and test the revolver as an exhibit; to the extent that the trial judge's remarks could be taken as inviting an experiment about the involuntary movement of a finger under stress, the jury had been warned of the unreliability of such an experiment and no miscarriage warranting special leave was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From a Judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales Dismissing an Appeal From Conviction in the District Court
Outcome
Application for special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['jury Use of Exhibits' 'real Evidence' 'experiments in the Jury Room' 'judicial Directions' 'accidental Discharge of Firearm' 'special Leave to Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'appellate Procedure'] ['jury Use of Exhibits' 'real Evidence' 'experiments in the Jury Room' 'judicial Directions' 'accidental Discharge of Firearm' 'special Leave to Appeal']

Case Brief

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 / Application for Special Leave to Appeal From a Judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales Dismissing an Appeal From Conviction in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury by demonstrating and inviting them to experiment with the revolver during deliberations.' 'Whether a jury may examine, handle and test an exhibit, including a firearm, or whether such testing becomes impermissible gathering of additional evidence.' 'Whether any error in the summing up caused a miscarriage of justice warranting special leave to appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

Special leave was refused because, reading the summing up as a whole, the jury were fairly left to determine whether the Crown had proved that the revolver was discharged deliberately and not accidentally. The jury were entitled to examine and test the revolver as an exhibit; to the extent that the trial judge's remarks could be taken as inviting an experiment about the involuntary movement of a finger under stress, the jury had been warned of the unreliability of such an experiment and no miscarriage warranting special leave was shown.

Court Disposition

Application for special leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for special leave to appeal refused.']