Roland v State of Tasmania

Roland appealed his conviction for trafficking against the State of Tasmania. The appeal concerned allegations of conduct by his defence counsel during the trial that Roland contended led to a miscarriage of justice.

The central legal issue before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania was whether the conduct of Roland's trial counsel, specifically the failure to adduce evidence from defence witnesses, resulted in a miscarriage of justice that warranted setting aside the conviction.

The Court found that while it was regrettable that defence witnesses were not called, this decision was a matter of trial strategy and did not, in itself, demonstrate that the trial was unfair or that Roland was prejudiced. The judges considered the evidence presented at trial and concluded that even if the defence witnesses had testified, it was unlikely to have altered the outcome. Therefore, no miscarriage of justice had occurred, and the appeal was dismissed.