Garay v the Queen (No 3)

This matter concerned an appeal against conviction by the appellant, Garay, following a trial by judge alone. The appeal was heard by McCallum CJ, Elkaim and Collier JJ in the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales. The central dispute revolved around the reasonableness of the verdicts of guilt returned by the trial judge, with the appellant contending that the evidence adduced did not sufficiently support these findings.

The Court was required to determine several key legal issues. These included whether the verdicts of guilt were unreasonable, whether the trial judge had failed to apply the *Liberato* direction concerning the need for corroboration in certain circumstances, and whether the *Markuleski* direction, relating to the assessment of evidence where an accused relies on a defence that is not directly contradicted, had been properly applied. Furthermore, the Court considered whether the trial judge had fulfilled the minimum requirement to expose their reasoning process, particularly in light of the contested credibility of the complainant. The applicability of the proviso, allowing an appeal to be dismissed despite a legal error if no substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred, was also a consideration.

The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal. Their Honours found that the evidence adduced at trial did support the findings of guilt made by the trial judge. The Court concluded that the trial judge had adequately applied the relevant directions, including those concerning the *Liberato* and *Markuleski* principles, and had sufficiently articulated their reasoning process. Consequently, the Court determined that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred, and therefore, the proviso was applied to dismiss the appeal.