Keenan v The Queen

The appeal concerned a conviction for armed robbery, brought before the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory by the self-represented appellant. The central dispute revolved around the fairness of the trial proceedings, particularly the refusal of an adjournment, the appellant's conduct during the trial, and alleged failures by the trial judge to intervene or assist the appellant, who was unrepresented.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in refusing the appellant's application for an adjournment, whether the conduct of the trial, including the appellant's failure to cross-examine witnesses and present alibi evidence, rendered the trial unfair, and whether the appellant's restraint during the proceedings constituted a miscarriage of justice. The court also considered whether the trial judge's management of the trial, in light of the appellant's self-representation, was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the trial judge had not erred in refusing the adjournment, finding that the appellant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for such a request. The court further held that while the appellant's self-representation presented challenges, the trial judge had acted appropriately in managing the proceedings and had not failed in any duty to assist the appellant. The court concluded that the appellant's conduct, including the failure to cross-examine and present alibi evidence, was a consequence of his own choices and did not, in itself, demonstrate a miscarriage of justice. The principles applied focused on the discretion of the trial judge in managing proceedings and the onus on an appellant to demonstrate unfairness or error.

The appeal was dismissed.