25 May 2023
Judge's finding that the officer followed the POL515 procedure and that the appellant was likely confused by the $700 infringement fee stated in the form (not told he would pay $720 medical/analyst fees) is supported by the record and witness signatures; no unfair obtaining of evidential breath result, therefore conviction stands and appeal dismissed.
11 Oct 2022
The High Court found no credible evidence that police threatened arrest or misrepresented that refusal would lead to custody; the sergeant's conduct was firm but not oppressive, the prosecution negated any reasonable possibility that consent was unfairly obtained, and even if a causative link existed exclusion under s30 would be disproportionate, therefore the blood sample was admissible and the conviction stands.
2 Sept 2019
The Court dismissed the appeal because trial evidence did not displace the factual basis of the earlier pre-trial ruling, there was no relevant development in law to overturn the prior decision, and the s 30 balancing was correctly performed — the trespass was minimal and the privacy interest in a short-term rental was reduced by contractual conditions and prior access, so admission of the evidence was proportionate.
16 Aug 2019
The High Court held police reasonably facilitated the appellant's right to consult a lawyer at the critical box H stage (appellant was permitted to call, offered and put through to duty lawyers and given private telephone contact), there was no breach at the box K/L stages that materially affected the obtaining of the evidential breath test, the evidential breath test was not improperly obtained nor unfair to admit, and even if there had been an impropriety the s30(3) factors weighed against exclusion; therefore the appeal was dismissed and conviction upheld.
9 Oct 2018
Leave to bring a second appeal was declined because the issues raised did not amount to a matter of general or public importance and did not demonstrate any real risk of miscarriage of justice; the trial Judge's credibility findings and evidential rulings were within permissible appellate deference and the sentence was not manifestly excessive.
11 Apr 2016
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and framed the central question as whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding the High Court had no jurisdiction to exclude evidence obtained by search and, if so, whether that evidence should be excluded; the Court scheduled the substantive hearing to determine that question.
11 Apr 2016
The application for leave to bring a second appeal was declined because the proposed grounds did not raise matters of general or public importance nor a real risk of miscarriage of justice; Moore J correctly held the facilitation duty did not require ongoing re-offers of counsel and that the constable reasonably exercised the discretion under s70(1) in abandoning further breath testing and requiring a blood specimen.
8 Jun 2015
The application for bail was dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate on the balance of probabilities that exceptional circumstances exist; the asserted grounds of appeal were not shown to be sufficiently meritorious on the material before the Court and there was no established appreciable delay such that continued detention would be unjust.
18 Feb 2014
No exceptional circumstances under s14 of the Supreme Court Act 2003 justified a direct appeal; leave to appeal directly was dismissed. A pre-trial publication prohibition was necessary to protect the fairness of the impending trial; publication in law reports or digests was permitted.
26 Nov 2013
Leave to appeal was dismissed because the applicant failed to show it was necessary in the interests of justice for the Supreme Court to hear the interlocutory appeal before trial under s 13(4); the Court of Appeal's conclusion that exclusion would be disproportionate was not displaced on this application.