Zhong v The King

The case of Zhong v The King concerns an appeal brought by the appellant against the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appellant sought leave to bring a second appeal against a conviction for incitement to murder, arguing that there was fresh and compelling evidence that warranted a review of his conviction. The matter was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the evidence presented by the appellant was both fresh and compelling, and if so, whether it was sufficient to warrant leave to bring a second appeal. The Court was required to examine the six categories of evidence put forward by the appellant to determine if any of them met both criteria. The Court applied the principles set out in Roberts v The Queen to guide its analysis.

The Court found that four of the six categories of evidence were not fresh as they were either already considered by the Court of Appeal or were not sufficiently new. The remaining two categories of evidence were found to be fresh but not compelling. The Court held that even if the evidence was fresh, it was not compelling enough to warrant leave to bring a second appeal. The Court further noted that the appellant had not demonstrated any significant miscarriage of justice that would warrant an exception to the general rule against second appeals. Consequently, the Court refused the appellant leave to bring a second appeal.

No further orders were made by the Court.