Following Dansie, an alleged error in a trial judge's reasoning in resolving a factual dispute on a judge-alone trial does not engage the first limb of s 6(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) but may engage the third limb as a miscarriage of justice. Where the factual dispute falls within the trial judge's advantage in seeing and hearing the evidence, there is room for a separate third limb complaint about erroneous reasoning even where the first limb complaint fails. On sentencing, there is a critical distinction between a sentencing judge not being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of a fact adverse to the offender and the sentencing judge being satisfied on the balance of probabilities of the converse favourable fact.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.