R v Fraser [2001] QCA 187

CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - OBJECTIONS AND POINTS NOT RAISED IN COURT BELOW - IMPROPER ADMISSION OR REJECTION OF EVIDENCE - whether the admission of potentially prejudicial evidence should have resulted in the discharging of the jury.

CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE -CIRCUMSTANCES NOT INVOLVING MISCARRIAGE OR IN WHICH MISCARRIAGE NOT SUBSTANTIAL -IMPROPER ADMISSION OR REJECTION OF EVIDENCE - whether on the whole of the evidence there has been a substantial miscarriage of justice - whether prejudicial evidence affected the judgment of the jury such that the jury should have been discharged - whether the proviso is applicable. CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE - APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS - APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE - WHEN REFUSED - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - SEXUAL OFFENCES - whether sentence of indefinite imprisonment justified.

Jury Act 1995 s 60(1)

Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 Part 10, s 163, s 165(1), s 169, s 170, s 171, s 173

Crofts v The Queen [1996] HCA 22; (1996) 186 CLR 427, considered

De Jesus v The Queen (1987) 61 ALRJ 1, referred to

The Queen v Fletcher CA No 243 of 1998, 25 September 1998, followed

Maric v R (1978) 20 ALR 513, referred to

R v Glennon [1992] HCA 16; (1992) 173 CLR 592, considered

R v Knape [1965] VicRp 63; [1965] VR 469, considered

The Queen v Wilson CA Nos 200 of 1996 and 333 of 1996, 28 November 1997, followed

Webb and Hay v R [1994] HCA 30; (1993-4) 181 CLR 41, considered

Wilde v The Queen [1988] HCA 6; (1987-88) 164 CLR 365, distinguished

Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent