Craig v The Queen [2018] HCA 13

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIEFEL CJ, BELL, GAGELER, KEANE, NETTLE, GORDON AND EDELMAN JJ

RONALD MICHAEL CRAIG APPELLANT

AND

THE QUEEN RESPONDENT

Craig v The Queen [2018] HCA 13 21 March 2018 B24/2017

ORDER

Appeal dismissed.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of Queensland

Representation

J A Griffin QC with E P Mac Giolla Ri and K M Hillard for the appellant (instructed by Fisher Dore Lawyers)

C W Heaton QC with J A Wooldridge for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld))

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Craig v The Queen

Criminal law – Appeal against conviction – Murder and manslaughter – Intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm – Incorrect advice – Where appellant's case was that he had not intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm – Where appellant incorrectly advised that giving evidence would likely lead to cross-examination on prior convictions – Where chance of cross-examination on prior convictions possible but not likely due to s 15(2) of Evidence Act 1977 (Q) – Where appellant's account of incident to his solicitor inconsistent with prior statements to police – Where appellant was correctly advised that giving evidence would likely lead to cross-examination on inconsistencies – Where appellant gave evidence on appeal that had he been physically and mentally well and absent the incorrect advice he would have given evidence at trial – Where no evidence to suggest trial would have been conducted differently absent the incorrect advice – Whether no miscarriage of justice.

Words and phrases – "criminal history", "cross-examination", "decision not to give evidence", "fair trial", "inconsistent evidence", "incorrect advice", "intent", "intoxication", "miscarriage of justice", "murder", "prior convictions".