Fantakis v R [2023] NSWCCA 3

Fantakis v R [2023] NSWCCA 3

The appeal was dismissed as none of the grounds individually or cumulatively established a miscarriage of justice. The evidence did not require the defences of mental illness or substantial impairment to be left to the jury. Errors regarding jury ballot and directions did not create a substantial miscarriage. No fresh evidence was established, nor was the verdict unreasonable. Counsel's conduct was forensically rational, and the directions and procedural complaints did not amount to legal error requiring a new trial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw), Post Conviction Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed. Leave to appeal granted to the extent necessary on all grounds.
Legal Topics
['appeals' 'fresh Evidence' 'incompetence of Counsel' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'mental Illness Defence' 'substantial Impairment' 'directions to Jury' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'evidence Admissibility' 'split Crown Case' 'non Disclosure' 'procedural Fairness']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeals' 'fresh Evidence' 'incompetence of Counsel' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'mental Illness Defence' 'substantial Impairment' 'directions to Jury' 'consciousness of Guilt' 'evidence Admissibility' 'split Crown Case' 'non Disclosure' 'procedural Fairness']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal (nsw), Post Conviction Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence relied upon by appellant is fresh evidence' 'Whether trial counsel was incompetent or failed to follow instructions' 'Whether failure to cross-examine on existence of documents or non-disclosure caused miscarriage' 'Whether trial judge erred by failing to leave defence of mental illness or substantial impairment to the jury' 'Whether judge erred in admitting evidence or failing to leave manslaughter on basis of self-defence, provocation' 'Whether split or shift in Crown case caused trial to miscarry' 'Whether directions to jury were inadequate' 'Whether error in jury ballot process caused miscarriage']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as none of the grounds individually or cumulatively established a miscarriage of justice. The evidence did not require the defences of mental illness or substantial impairment to be left to the jury. Errors regarding jury ballot and directions did not create a substantial miscarriage. No fresh evidence was established, nor was the verdict unreasonable. Counsel's conduct was forensically rational, and the directions and procedural complaints did not amount to legal error requiring a new trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed. Leave to appeal granted to the extent necessary on all grounds.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted on all grounds to the extent required.' 'Appeal dismissed.']