Foster v The Queen [1993] HCA 80

Foster v The Queen [1993] HCA 80

The appellant's confessional statement was the only evidence against him and was obtained after police unlawfully arrested him solely for interrogation and detained him in custody in circumstances that deprived him of legal or independent support and placed him in a position of vulnerability. The trial judge exercised the discretion to admit the evidence on the erroneous basis that the arrest was lawful, and the Court of Criminal Appeal misconceived the trial judge's reasons in holding that the discretion had not miscarried. A proper exercise of the discretion required exclusion of the confession because its reception and use against the appellant would be unfair; the conviction therefore...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
['confessional Statements' 'voluntariness' 'unlawful Arrest' 'police Interrogation' 'discretion to Exclude Evidence for Unfairness' 'public Policy Discretion to Exclude Unlawfully Obtained Evidence' 'voir Dire']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['confessional Statements' 'voluntariness' 'unlawful Arrest' 'police Interrogation' 'discretion to Exclude Evidence for Unfairness' 'public Policy Discretion to Exclude Unlawfully Obtained Evidence' 'voir Dire']

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 Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the High Court of Australia From the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Court of Criminal Appeal was mistaken in upholding the trial judge's decision to admit evidence of the appellant's confessional statement." "Whether the appellant's confessional statement, signed while he was unlawfully detained after arrest solely for interrogation, should have been excluded on the ground that its reception would be unfair to the accused." 'Whether the confessional statement should also have been excluded on public policy grounds because of unlawful police conduct.' 'Whether the trial judge erred in determining voluntariness without resolving allegations of threats by police.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's confessional statement was the only evidence against him and was obtained after police unlawfully arrested him solely for interrogation and detained him in custody in circumstances that deprived him of legal or independent support and placed him in a position of vulnerability. The trial judge exercised the discretion to admit the evidence on the erroneous basis that the arrest was lawful, and the Court of Criminal Appeal misconceived the trial judge's reasons in holding that the discretion had not miscarried. A proper exercise of the discretion required exclusion of the confession because its reception and use against the appellant would be unfair; the conviction therefore...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • ['The order of the Court of Criminal Appeal should be set aside.' 'In lieu thereof, the appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal should be allowed.' "The appellant's conviction should be quashed." 'A verdict of acquittal should be entered.' 'There should be no order for a new trial.']