The appellant appealed his assault conviction, arguing the trial judge erred by granting only a 20-minute adjournment after the Crown made late disclosure of a photograph and text messages during the complainant's cross-examination.
The Superior Court found that while the trial judge's adjournment decision was based on improper principles and a faulty factual foundation, the defence was not prejudiced.
The defence was able to fully cross-examine the complainant on the new evidence, meaning no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred.
The appeal was dismissed under the curative proviso.
