The Queen v Stafford

[1992] QCA 269

To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon next to the case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.

Event	Citation or File	Date	Notes
Primary Judgment	SC30/92 (No citation)	25 Mar 1992	Date of conviction of murder. The Crown’s case at trial was that the accused killed the deceased in her house and kept her body, before disposing of it, in the boot of his car.
Appeal Determined (QCA)	[1992] QCA 269	25 Aug 1992	Appeal against conviction dismissed; complaint about trial judge’s directions touching on accused’s interest in the outcome of the trial, in the context of evaluating his evidence, not made out, the remarks in question having been favourable to the accused; wrongful admission of certain irrelevant evidence unlikely to have prejudiced accused and, in any event, the admissible evidence was such that the jury would inevitably have convicted accused: Davies and McPherson JJA and Thomas J.
Appeal Determined (QCA)	[1997] QCA 333	23 Sep 1997	A-G reference under s 672A(a) of Criminal Code (Qld) (‘Code’); appeal against conviction dismissed; further evidence, although casting doubt on correctness of scenario relied upon by Crown at trial, not such as to, upon all the evidence, raise requisite doubt as to accused’s guilt: Davies and McPherson JJA (Fitzgerald P dissented; jury convicted accused on factual basis shown to be erroneous; accused deprived of fair chance of acquittal; evidence sufficiently cogent to order retrial).
Appeal Determined (QCA)	[2009] QCA 407	24 Dec 2009	Further A-G reference under Code s 672A(a); appeal against conviction allowed, conviction set aside, retrial ordered; that Crown case at trial shown by further evidence to be unsustainable constituted a significant denial of procedural fairness warranting quashing the conviction: Keane and Fraser JJA (Holmes JA dissented on whether to order retrial; her Honour found that state of evidence such that jury could not be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of accused’s guilt).
Special Leave Refused (HCA)	(1993) 67 ALJR 510	04 Mar 1993	Application for special leave to appeal against [1992] QCA 269 refused; Court of Appeal not shown to have erred in its characterisation of trial judge’s comments relating to accused’s interest in outcome of trial as being favourable to accused; failure of accused’s counsel to seek redirection also militated against grant of special leave: Deane, Dawson and Toohey JJ.
Special Leave Refused (HCA)	[1998] HCATrans 114	17 Apr 1998	Special leave to appeal against [1997] QCA 333 refused; no significant possibility that jury would have acquitted accused had they had the further evidence before them: McHugh and Kirby JJ. Published on JADE under [1998] HCATrans 112.

Case Name	Full Citation	Frequency
R v Hargraves	[2010] QCA 328	3 citations
R v Rezk	[1994] 2 Qd R 321; [1993] QCA 379	1 citation
R v Stafford	[2009] QCA 407	2 citations
The Queen v Stafford	[1997] QCA 333	1 citation

Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode

The Queen v Stafford[1992] QCA 269

The Queen v Stafford[1992] QCA 269

Editorial Notes

Litigation History

Appeal Status

Cases Cited List of Cases Cited by this judgment

Cases Citing List of cases on Queensland Judgments citing this Judgment