Vo v WA

[2012] WASCA 6

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Drug offence
4. › Possession with intent to sell or supply
5. › Whether prosecution failed to disclose relevant material
6. › Whether prior conviction of third party was disclosable
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), ss 42, 95
1. Criminal Law
2. › Disclosure
3. › Prosecution's obligation to disclose
4. › Pre-trial disclosure under s 95(6)
5. › Whether material 'may assist the accused's defence'
6. › Sensible appraisal by prosecution
7. › Whether obligation extends to potentially relevant material
8. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), ss 42(1)(e), 95(6)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Disclosure
3. › Continuing disclosure obligation
4. › Scope of obligation under s 95(9)
5. › Whether obligation requires actual possession by prosecutor
6. › Whether obligation arises where material changes character due to new issues at trial
7. › Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 95(9)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Possession of drugs
4. › Inference of knowledge and dominion from control of premises
5. › Whether reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence available
6. › Whether alternative possessor reasonably open on the evidence

Quick Take

The continuing disclosure obligation under s 95(9) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA) requires actual possession of the material by the prosecutor and does not require the prosecution to proactively investigate to discover material relevant to issues first raised by the defence at trial. The pre-trial disclosure obligation under s 95(6) is assessed by reference to the issues that existed at the time the obligation arose, based on a sensible appraisal by the prosecution. Whether s 95(9) extends to material that changes character due to new issues raised at trial remains an open question.