The appellant appealed his convictions for a series of robbery and related offences following a judge-alone trial that turned on the question of identity.
Duty counsel argued the convictions constituted an unreasonable verdict, advancing four arguments relating to the trial judge's findings regarding Facebook Messenger communications, the robber's appearance, clothing, and proximity to the location where the van and drugs were found.
The court held the verdict was based on findings of fact open to the trial judge, to which deference was owed.
Duty counsel's additional argument that electronic messages should have been treated as presumptively inadmissible bad character evidence was rejected, as the trial judge concluded the messages were referable to the offence in question.
The appeal was dismissed.
