Duckworth v WA [No 4]

[2018] WASCA 2

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Miscarriage of justice
4. › Deficient representation
5. › Self-representation
6. › Whether incompetent self-representation rendered trial unfair
7. › Whether principles governing deficient legal representation apply by analogy to self-representation
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Miscarriage of justice
4. › Two categories of deficient representation
5. › First category — departure from presuppositions of fair trial
6. › Second category — material irregularity affecting outcome
7. › Whether combined effect of multiple deficiencies sufficient
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Extension of time
4. › Lengthy delay
5. › Whether exceptional circumstances shown
6. › Whether miscarriage of justice if extension not granted

Quick Take

The principles governing appeals based on deficient legal representation (the two-category framework from TKWJ v The Queen) apply by analogy to self-representation cases, but with three modifications: (1) the standard of competence expected is lower than for a qualified practitioner; (2) a broader range of considerations may explain forensic decisions; and (3) courts should be alert to tactical self-representation. Where an appellant relies on the first category (departure from presuppositions of fair trial), the departures must be of a gross character — a combination of lesser irregularities will not suffice unless the forensic consequences of each are demonstrated.