R v Bazan

In *R v Bazan*, the appellant was convicted in the District Court by a jury on two counts of rape. The central dispute at trial concerned the defendant's state of mind regarding the complainant's consent, with consent itself being a key issue.

The appeal raised the question of whether the incompetence of defence counsel at trial resulted in a risk of a miscarriage of justice. Specifically, the court considered whether defence counsel's failure to cross-examine on a critical matter relating to the defendant's state of mind, failure to explore the effect of drug use, failure to lead good character evidence, and failure to explore prior sexual relationship instructions constituted a miscarriage of justice.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia held that the failure to cross-examine on critical matters was a significant deficiency in the presentation of the defence. The court also noted that good character evidence was important as it related to the credibility of the defendant. Consequently, the court found a real risk that a miscarriage of justice had occurred due to the manner in which the defence case was presented and conducted.

The appeal was allowed, the convictions were set aside, and a retrial was ordered.