Andrew O'Keefe is hoping to overturn convictions for domestic violence and drug possession, with the ex-TV star's lawyer arguing a magistrate did not give "competing versions" of events proper weight.
The troubled former Seven Network host was convicted of three counts of domestic violence-related assault, twice contravening an AVO against him, and two charges for possessing a prohibited drug.
O'Keefe was ordered to serve 18 months on a community corrections order, which involves supervision and reporting requirements, and fined $800 for the drug offences.
The 52-year-old faces unrelated charges of contravening an apprehended violence order and stalking or intimidating a man, for which he was granted bail on Monday.
His barrister Phillip Boulten SC told a District Court hearing on Wednesday that Magistrate Alison Viney made a number of legal errors in finding O'Keefe guilty of domestic violence assault earlier this year.
O'Keefe maintains the woman in those matters was acting aggressively towards him and it was not a matter of him "simply assaulting her", the court was told.
This included, according to O'Keefe's account, the woman swinging a laptop computer at him.
"That then leaves Your Honour with a record of two significantly competing versions," Mr Boulten told the court.
"He's making accusations against her, she's making accusations against him."
O'Keefe claims he saw the woman inflict scratches on her own hand during an argument in September 2021 over which police were called to a residence in Sydney's eastern suburbs.
Mr Boulten said the woman's claim she scratched her hand on a hinge after being pushed into doorway by O'Keefe was not supported by physical evidence.
If the court finds the woman lied about how the wound was inflicted, there should be a "knock-on-effect" applied to the credibility of her other evidence, Mr Boulten argued.
"If she did scratch her hand deliberately when she was upset, devastated, angry or even extremely hostile towards the appellant, she would have known she did it," he said.
"If he didn't do it that's a very, very evil lie."
Judge John Pickering, overseeing the appeal, noted the woman initially told a triple -zero operator she did not want to pursue charges against O'Keefe.
"Actually put in its context, she isn't someone on that night who is keen to prosecute him at all," the judge said.
A crown prosecutor noted O'Keefe's defence team were "silent" over other injuries allegedly sustained by the woman on the night, including scratches to her chest and a bruise on her thigh.
"Your Honour will find that her evidence is truthful, reliable and accurate," he said.
"You would find that the offences were proven and should be upheld on appeal."
Mr Boulten argued an incident in which O'Keefe admitted spitting in the woman's face should not be used as tendency evidence to support a finding of guilt over an assault on another occasion.
Judge Pickering questioned why it would not be open to the judge to use O'Keefe's admission to establish he has a "tendency to spit into the face of a woman when he gets angry or frustrated".
"Most men in our society …. do not spit in their partner's face," the judge said.
O'Keefe also hopes to overturn a drug conviction, maintaining a bag of the synthetic stimulant drug mephedrone - also known as meow meow - did not belong to him.
The matter has been listed for judgment on September 9.
1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732)
Lifeline 13 11 14
