Muller v The State of Western Australia

In the case of Muller v The State of Western Australia, the appellant was convicted of serious sexual offences and sought leave to appeal on the grounds of fresh evidence. The fresh evidence was an inconsistent out-of-court statement made by the complainant. The court was required to determine whether this fresh evidence, which was relevant only to the credibility of the complainant, could establish a miscarriage of justice. The central legal issue was whether the fresh evidence could cause a reasonable jury to doubt the complainant's evidence to such an extent that there was a significant possibility that the appellant could be acquitted.

The court examined the principles governing appeals on the basis of fresh evidence. It noted that for an appeal to succeed on this basis, the fresh evidence must have the capacity to cause a reasonable jury to doubt the complainant's evidence and thereby create a significant possibility of acquittal. The court also considered that if the complainant was not called to give evidence at the appeal hearing, the fresh evidence would need to be compelling enough to demonstrate that a reasonable jury could accept it as true. The court concluded that, in the absence of the complainant's testimony, the fresh evidence in this case was not sufficiently compelling to establish that a reasonable jury could accept it as true or doubt the complainant's evidence to such an extent that there was a significant possibility of acquittal.

The appeal was dismissed, as the fresh evidence did not meet the threshold required to establish a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the fresh evidence did not undermine the complainant's evidence to the point where it could cause a reasonable jury to doubt her credibility sufficiently to create a significant possibility of acquittal. Consequently, the appellant's conviction was upheld.