Biljuh v R [2023] NSWCCA 193

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Biljuh v R [2023] NSWCCA 193 Hearing dates: 14 July 2023 Date of orders: 04 August 2023 Decision date: 04 August 2023 Before: Stern JA at [1]; Fagan J at [256]; Yehia J at [260]. Decision: (1) An extension of time for filing the notice of appeal is granted. (2) To the extent required, leave to appeal is granted. (3) The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against conviction – Miscarriage of justice – whether failure to disclose evidence – where no objection taken at trial and evidence tendered without objection – no miscarriage of justice – conviction upheld. CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against conviction – Miscarriage of justice – whether conduct of prosecution led to unfair trial – prosecutor's obligations – no miscarriage of justice – conviction upheld. CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against conviction – Miscarriage of justice – jury directions – whether trial judge gave adequate directions – where no further directions sought by counsel – no miscarriage of justice – conviction upheld. CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against conviction – whether jury verdict unreasonable – where appellant convicted of murder – strong circumstantial case – open to jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt - jury's advantage over court of appeal – conviction upheld. CRIME – Appeals – Appeal against conviction – Miscarriage of justice –whether forensic disadvantage caused by conditions on remand – matters did not impair the fairness of the trial – conviction upheld. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 18(1)(a) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5(1)(b), 6(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 141(1)(a), 142(1)(f), (i), 183(1), (2)(b), 183(3), 188 Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1986 (NSW), s 13(1) Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 137 Legal Profession Uniform Conduct (Barristers) Rules 2015 (NSW), rr 83, 84, 85, 87, 93 Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), rr 3.5(2)(b), 3.5, 4.15 Cases Cited: Dansie v R [2022] HCA 25; (2022) 96 ALJR 728 Delaney v R [2023] NSWCCA 181 Edwards v R (2021) 273 CLR 585; [2021] HCA 28 Fantakis v R; Woods v R [2017] NSWSC 1840 Grey v The Queen [2001] HCA 65; (2001) 75 ALJR 1708 Hofer v The Queen [2021] HCA 36; (2021) 95 ALJR 937 HT v The Queen (2019) 269 CLR 403; [2019] HCA 40 Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559; [2007] HCA 30 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 Mallard v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 125; [2005] HCA 68 MG v R (2007) 69 NSWLR 20; [2007] NSWCCA 57 Morris v R (1987) 163 CLR 454; [1987] HCA 50 Pell v The Queen (2020) 268 CLR 123; [2020] HCA 12 R v Biljuh (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 702 R v Biljuh (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 710 R v Biljuh (No 7) [2015] NSWSC 1917 R v Biljuh [2015] NSWSC 660 R v MRW [1999] NSWCCA 452; (1999) 113 A Crim R 308 R v Rugari [2001] NSWCCA 64; (2001) 122 A Crim R 1 R v TS [2004] NSWCCA 38; (2004) 144 A Crim R 124 Sio v The Queen (2016) 259 CLR 47; [2016] HCA 32 Weiss v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 300; [2005] HCA 81 Whitehorn v The Queen (1983) 152 CLR 657; [1983] HCA 42 Wood v R (2012) 84 NSWLR 581; [2012] NSWCCA 21 Xie v R [2022] NSWCCA 184 Xu v R [2023] NSWCCA 93 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dario Biljuh (Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Self-represented (Applicant) A Bonnor (Respondent)