AK v R [2022] NSWCCA 175

AK v R [2022] NSWCCA 175

The failure to call two material character witnesses was due to defence inadvertence and not a forensic decision. Their evidence was capable of supporting the applicant's credibility and making the jury entertain a reasonable doubt; therefore, there is a significant possibility their absence affected the outcome. A miscarriage of justice occurred and the appellate court could not be satisfied of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, so the proviso could not be applied. The convictions were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Orders for Retrial
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered
Legal Topics
['appeals' 'sexual Offences' 'assault' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'character Evidence']
['criminal Law'] ['appeals' 'sexual Offences' 'assault' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'character Evidence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Orders for Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether failure to call character witnesses (Ms Zedan and Ms Alnimer) due to inadvertence of defence solicitors resulted in miscarriage of justice under s 6(1) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)' 'Whether any miscarriage of justice could be saved by the proviso to s 6(1)']

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to call two material character witnesses was due to defence inadvertence and not a forensic decision. Their evidence was capable of supporting the applicant's credibility and making the jury entertain a reasonable doubt; therefore, there is a significant possibility their absence affected the outcome. A miscarriage of justice occurred and the appellate court could not be satisfied of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, so the proviso could not be applied. The convictions were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Allow the appeal.' 'Quash the convictions entered in the District Court of New South Wales on 17 December 2020.' 'Order a new trial.' 'List for Mention at the Sydney District Court in Court 3.1 at 9:30am on 26 August 2022.' 'Direct that no later than 6 weeks prior to the date of the...