R v Williams

The applicant, R v Williams, appealed against his conviction. The appeal concerned the admissibility of fresh evidence and the extension of time for lodging an appeal, which was significantly out of time. The case was heard by Peek, Blue and Lovell JJ.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether certain evidence, referred to as the "Mohi evidence," constituted fresh evidence that could warrant a new trial, and whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to pursue his appeal, given the extraordinary delay. The court was required to assess the significance of this alleged fresh evidence and determine if its introduction would have created a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, leading to a different verdict.

The court found that the "Mohi evidence" was not fresh evidence, as it was available to the applicant at the time of the original trial. Consequently, the applicant had not established that there was a significant possibility that the jury would have been left with a doubt and acquitted him had this evidence been presented. Given this finding, the court determined that the grounds of appeal had no prospects of success.

The application for an extension of time was refused and the appeal was dismissed. The court noted that the appeal was approximately 14 and a half years out of time, and the material provided did not satisfactorily explain this extraordinary delay. As the grounds of appeal were found to be without merit, the applicant conceded that there was no utility in granting an extension of time.