Conway v The Queen [2002] HCA 2

Conway v The Queen [2002] HCA 2

Although there was a misdirection regarding what evidence constituted corroboration of accomplice evidence, the verdict against the appellant was inevitable given the overwhelming and corroborated evidence. In light of s 28(1)(f) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the misdirection could not reasonably have influenced the result and no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred.

Parties
Appellant: John Terence Conway; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Corroboration, Unreliable Evidence, Misdirection, Appeals, Directions to Jury
Criminal Law Evidence Corroboration Unreliable Evidence Misdirection Appeals Directions to Jury

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Terence Conway

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether jury directions about corroboration of accomplice evidence constituted a misdirection of law
  2. 2 Effect of misdirection in light of Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 164, 165
  3. 3 Whether errors or misdirections require a new trial absent substantial miscarriage of justice

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was a misdirection regarding what evidence constituted corroboration of accomplice evidence, the verdict against the appellant was inevitable given the overwhelming and corroborated evidence. In light of s 28(1)(f) of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the misdirection could not reasonably have influenced the result and no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed