Satybaldin v The Queen

Yevgeniy Satybaldin appeals against his convictions on four counts of assault against his former partner, Maria Lashuk. The appellant contends he was denied a fair trial due to two actions of the trial judge, Judge Behrens. Firstly, after counsel had addressed the jury, the Judge split one count of the indictment into two separate counts. Secondly, the Judge did not advise the jury that they could ask questions during the trial. Additionally, the appellant submits new evidence on one of the counts shows the unreliability of the complainant’s evidence on that count. The Court of Appeal found the application to admit new evidence declined and the appeal dismissed. The Court found there was power to amend the indictment under either s 330 or s 335 of the Crimes Act, and that the amendment had not prejudiced the appellant. The Court also found that the trial judge was not required to advise the jury of their ability to submit questions, and that the omission could not possibly give rise to a miscarriage. The Court declined to admit the affidavit of Maxim Lemeshenko as it was not sufficiently fresh.