› application to appeal against conviction on basis of fresh and compelling evidence
› where applicant pleaded guilty to perjury
› where sentencing judge found perjury extended to comments in addition to those for which applicant entered plea of guilty
› where purported fresh evidence is affidavit tendered in unrelated proceedings
› consideration of interests of justice
› whether appeal the appropriate course in the circumstances
Statutory Interpretation
› CRIMINAL APPEAL PROVISIONS
› Part 8AB of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT)
› application for leave to appeal against conviction on basis of fresh and compelling evidence
› meaning of “fresh evidence”
› meaning of “compelling evidence”
› meaning of “convicted person”
› whether Part 8AB applicable to convictions following guilty pleas
Quick Take
1Part 8AB of the Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT) applies to convictions resulting from guilty pleas, not only convictions after contested trials; the natural meaning of 'convicted person' and 'proceeding in which the convicted person was convicted' encompasses guilty plea proceedings.
2Evidence that could have been obtained and tendered in sentencing proceedings through the exercise of reasonable diligence is not 'fresh' within s 68ZE(1)(b), even where practical difficulties existed in calling the witness; the applicant bears the burden of demonstrating the evidence could not have been tendered.
3Where the substance of the complaint concerns factual findings made at sentence rather than the integrity of the guilty plea itself, and the applicant publicly confessed guilt and declined opportunities to withdraw the plea, the interests of justice weigh against granting leave under s 68ZG.
