Feng (a pseudonym) v The King

[2025] VSCA 45

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Relevance
4. › Scientific evidence
5. › Fingerprint and DNA evidence
6. › Whether fingerprint and DNA evidence linking accused to items in clandestine drug laboratory was relevant
7. › Whether evidence must be considered in isolation or in conjunction with other evidence
8. › Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), s 55(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Evidence
3. › Discretionary and mandatory exclusions
4. › Unfair prejudice
5. › CSI effect
6. › Whether probative value of DNA and fingerprint evidence outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice
7. › Whether risk of misuse manageable by jury directions
8. › Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), ss 135, 137
1. Criminal Law
2. › Drug offences
3. › Possession
4. › Whether exclusive possession must be proved
5. › Joint possession
6. › Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic), ss 70(1), 71, 71A(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Interlocutory appeal
3. › Leave to appeal against ruling on admissibility of evidence
4. › Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), s 295(3)

Quick Take

Fingerprint and DNA evidence linking an accused to items in a clandestine drug laboratory is relevant under s 55(1) of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) even where the scientific evidence cannot establish when or in what circumstances the accused's fingerprints or DNA were deposited, provided the evidence is assessed in conjunction with other circumstantial evidence in the case.

Case Details

Citation[2025] VSCA 45

CourtVSCA

JurisdictionVictoria

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on19

2020Volpe v The QueenVSCA 268
2018The Queen v FalzonHCA 29
2017Hughes v The QueenHCA 20
2017DPP v PaulinoVSCA 38
and 15 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in