Application by Thomas Hudson Wilson pursuant to s 78 Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001

Thomas Hudson Wilson applied to the Supreme Court for an inquiry into his conviction under section 78 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW). The application was based on the contention that the trial judge erred in admitting photo identification evidence and that the identification of seized items was not properly established. The court was asked to determine whether the application met the criteria for a review of the conviction under the relevant statutory provisions.

The court examined the grounds for the application, focusing on whether the applicant had raised special facts or special circumstances that warranted an inquiry into the conviction. It was noted that the application did not establish any special facts or special circumstances that would justify a review under section 78. Additionally, the court considered whether the photo identification evidence was properly admitted and whether the identification of the seized items was adequately supported. The court found that there was no error in the admission of the evidence or in the identification of the seized items, as the requirements of the law were met without any sense of unease or disquiet being necessary.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the application, finding that it did not meet the statutory criteria for a review of the conviction. The application was unsuccessful because it failed to demonstrate special facts or special circumstances that would warrant an inquiry into the conviction, and the court upheld the original findings regarding the evidence and identification. The application was dismissed, and no further review was granted.