Nicholls v The Queen
Download as PDF
Download as Word
Highlights
My Notes
Collections
Create a New Collection
Overview
Full Text
Details
Case
Agency Issuance Number
Published Date
Nicholls v The Queen
[2005] HCA 1
Tags
No tags available
Case
Nicholls v The Queen
[2005] HCA 1
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJTHOMAS NICHOLLS APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTNicholls v The Queen[2005] HCA 13 February 2005P79/2003ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaRepresentation:J A Thomson for the appellant (instructed by Mullins Handcock)S E Stone with L J Vanderende for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (WA))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJMARTIN GRAEME COATES APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTCoates v The Queen3 February 2005P81/2003ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia made on 22 October 2002 in CCA 210/00 and in its place order that:(a)the appellant's appeal to that Court be allowed; (b)the appellant's conviction be quashed; and(c)there be a new trial. On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaRepresentation:M J McCusker QC with J J Edelman for the appellant (instructed by Clark Whyte)S E Stone with L J Vanderende for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (WA))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSNicholls v The Queen; Coates v The QueenCriminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of admissions made off-video during interview with accused – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping admissions – Criminal Code (WA), s 570D(2)(b), (4).Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of evidence of...
Continue reading the full case
Tags
No tags available
Case
Nicholls v The Queen
[2005] HCA 1
•
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJTHOMAS NICHOLLS APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTNicholls v The Queen[2005] HCA 13 February 2005P79/2003ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaRepresentation:J A Thomson for the appellant (instructed by Mullins Handcock)S E Stone with L J Vanderende for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (WA))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,McHUGH, GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJMARTIN GRAEME COATES APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN RESPONDENTCoates v The Queen3 February 2005P81/2003ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia made on 22 October 2002 in CCA 210/00 and in its place order that:(a)the appellant's appeal to that Court be allowed; (b)the appellant's conviction be quashed; and(c)there be a new trial. On appeal from the Supreme Court of Western AustraliaRepresentation:M J McCusker QC with J J Edelman for the appellant (instructed by Clark Whyte)S E Stone with L J Vanderende for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (WA))Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSNicholls v The Queen; Coates v The QueenCriminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of admissions made off-video during interview with accused – Whether reasonable excuse for not videotaping admissions – Criminal Code (WA), s 570D(2)(b), (4).Criminal law – Evidence – Admissibility of evidence of...