Johnson v The Queen

[2002] WASCA 78

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Trial
3. › Jury directions
4. › Prejudicial publicity
5. › Direction to disregard extraneous material
6. › Whether direction adequate to overcome risk of miscarriage of justice
7. › Whether reference to disregarding only 'irrelevant' material apt to mislead jury
1. Criminal Law
2. › Trial
3. › Change of venue
4. › Prejudicial pre-trial publicity
5. › Whether exceptional case and real and substantial reasons shown
6. › Criminal Code (WA), s 577
1. Criminal Law
2. › Trial
3. › Discharge of jury
4. › Prejudicial publicity during trial
5. › Whether judicial direction could overcome prejudicial effect
6. › Discretion of trial judge
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Cultivating cannabis with intent to sell or supply
5. › Hydroponic cultivation on commercial basis
6. › 184 plants
7. › Whether sentence of 8 years excessive having regard to statutory maximum of 10 years

Quick Take

A jury direction regarding prejudicial publicity that instructs jurors to disregard only 'irrelevant' extraneous material is inadequate and may occasion a miscarriage of justice; the direction must require jurors to disregard all extraneous material whether they regard it as relevant or not. For commercial hydroponic cannabis cultivation of approximately 184 plants, a sentence of 8 years (against a 10-year maximum) is excessive; a sentence in the range of 6 to 7 years is appropriate.