R v Forrest

The appeal concerned convictions arising from three home invasions. The appellant was convicted of multiple offences, including aggravated serious criminal trespass, aggravated endangering life, aggravated robbery, aggravated causing serious harm with intent to cause serious harm, and false imprisonment. The primary dispute on appeal related to fresh evidence concerning the Woodville Gardens home invasion, which the appellant argued created a significant possibility of acquittal had it been presented at trial.

The legal issues before the court included whether the convictions relating to the Woodville Gardens offending involved a miscarriage of justice due to the non-disclosure or late availability of evidence from Mr Angus Hume. The court was required to determine if this fresh evidence was material and cogent enough to warrant a new trial, considering whether the jury, acting reasonably, might have acquitted the appellant had this evidence been available. The court also considered the evidence of Mr Wilson, whose testimony was not strongly exculpatory but provided a further reason not to apply the proviso to the grounds on which the appellant had shown error.

The court allowed the appeal, finding that the convictions relating to the Woodville Gardens offending involved a miscarriage of justice due to the fresh evidence of Mr Hume. Mr Hume, who was in prison with the appellant after his conviction, claimed to have been present during the Woodville Gardens home invasion and stated that he saw only two offenders, neither of whom was the appellant. The court considered this evidence, along with Mr Wilson's testimony, and concluded that there was a significant possibility of acquittal had this evidence been presented at trial.

Consequently, the court ordered that the appeal be allowed, the convictions for the Woodville Gardens offences be set aside, and the matter be remitted for retrial.