Bolton v The State of Western Australia

The case of Bolton v The State of Western Australia involved an appeal by the appellant against his conviction and sentence for various criminal charges. The appellant sought leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal, including results of scientific tests that had been conducted after the trial. This evidence was intended to create a reasonable doubt about the appellant's guilt. The court was required to determine whether the additional evidence was "new" or "fresh" under section 40 of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), and whether it could raise a reasonable doubt about the appellant's guilt.

The court held that the additional evidence was not "new" or "fresh" as it was available at the time of the trial and could have been presented then. The court also held that the evidence was not capable of raising a reasonable doubt about the appellant's guilt, as it did not contradict any of the evidence presented at trial and did not provide any new insights into the case. The court held that the appropriate test for determining whether additional evidence was capable of raising a reasonable doubt was whether it had the potential to undermine the primary judge's conclusion on the essential facts.

The application for leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal was refused, as was the application to add a new ground of appeal. The application for leave to appeal was also refused, and the appeal was dismissed. The application for bail was dismissed as the appeal had been dismissed. The court held that the appellant had not demonstrated that the additional evidence was capable of raising a reasonable doubt about his guilt or that it was "new" or "fresh" under the Act. The court held that the evidence was cumulative and did not provide any new insights into the case. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the application for bail was dismissed as a result.