Achanfuo-Yeboah v The Queen (No 2) - [2017] ACTCA 11

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL

Case Title:	Achanfuo-Yeboah v The Queen (No 2)
Citation:	[2017] ACTCA 11
Hearing Dates:	24 March 2017
DecisionDate: Reasons Date:	30 March 2017 5 April 2017
Before:	Refshauge J
Decision:	1. That the stay of the sentence imposed on David Achanfuo-Yeboah on 26 May 2016 be extended to 4:00pm on 5 May 2017 and his bail be continued as varied by the addition of the following conditions: (a) That Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah deposit into the trust account of John O’Keefe, Solicitor, no less than $1000 on or before each of the following days: Friday 7 April 2017, Thursday 13 April 2017, Friday 21 April 2017, and Friday 28 April 2017, and a copy of the trust account receipt for each payment be filed in Court for each payment by the close of the next business day after the payment. (b) That Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah sell his 1994 model BMW sedan motor vehicle on or before 21 April 2017 and deposit the nett proceeds of such sale into the trust account of John O’Keefe, Solicitor, within two working days of the completion of the sale, and a copy of the trust account receipt for the deposit be filed in Court by the close of the next business day after the deposit. (c) That Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah prosecute the appeal without delay. 2. That leave to given to Ben Aulich and Associates to withdraw the application under r 5538 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT).
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bail – variation of bail – application for an extension of the stay of sentence – special and exceptional circumstances required – financial requirements to secure legal representation – bail and stay of sentence extended until the appeal
Legislation Cited:	Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 5538, 5606
Cases Cited:	Achanfuo-Yeboah v The Queen [2016] ACTCA 71 GJ v AS [2015] ACTCA 12 Investec Bank (Australia) Ltd v Mann [2012] VSC 87 Lauro v The Marble House of Australia [2013] SASC 17 Levitt Robinson Solicitors v Pereira [2010] QSC 119 Plenty v Gladwin (1986) 67 ALR 26 Plenty v Seventh Day Adventist Church of Port Pirie (Unreported, Supreme Court of South Australia, Lander J, 1 August 1996) Re Creehouse Ltd [1982] 2 All ER 422 Super 1000 Pty Ltd v Pacific General Securities Ltd [2007] NSWSC 171 Underwood, Son and Piper v Lewis [1894] 2 QB 306
Texts Cited:	Supreme Court of the ACT Practice Direction No 1 of 2016, Applications and Appeals to the Court of Appeal: Filing of Documents and Appeal Papers
Parties:	David Achanfuo-Yeboah (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent)
Representation:	Counsel Mr J O’Keefe (Appellant) Mr T Buckingham (Respondent)
Solicitors John O’Keefe, Solicitor (Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number:	ACTCA 20 of 2016
Decision under appeal:	Court/Tribunal: ACT Supreme Court Before: Burns J Date of Decision: 25 May 2016 Case Title: R v Le Clair; R v Yeboah Citation: [2016] ACTSC 126

REFSHAUGE J:

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Achanfuo-Yeboah v The Queen (No 2) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2017] ACTCA 11
Decision Date: 5 April 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In *Achanfuo-Yeboah v The Queen (No 2)*, Refshauge J considered an application by David Achanfuo-Yeboah for an extension of the stay of his sentence and the continuation of his bail. The application was made in the context of an ongoing appeal against his conviction and sentence.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether special and exceptional circumstances existed to justify extending the stay of sentence and continuing bail. This involved assessing whether the applicant's financial difficulties in securing adequate legal representation for his appeal constituted such circumstances.

Refshauge J reasoned that the applicant's inability to secure legal representation due to financial constraints, despite genuine efforts, amounted to special and exceptional circumstances. The Court applied the principle that access to legal representation is fundamental to the proper prosecution of an appeal. Consequently, the Court ordered that the stay of sentence imposed on Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah be extended to 4:00pm on 5 May 2017, and his bail be continued, subject to specific financial conditions designed to facilitate his legal representation and the prompt prosecution of his appeal. Leave was also granted for a separate application to be withdrawn.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. That the stay of the sentence imposed on David Achanfuo-Yeboah on 26 May 2016 be extended to 4:00pm on 5 May 2017 and his bail be continued as varied by the addition of the following conditions:

(a) That Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah deposit into the trust account of John O’Keefe, Solicitor, no less than $1000 on or before each of the following days: Friday 7 April 2017, Thursday 13 April 2017, Friday 21 April 2017, and Friday 28 April 2017, and a copy of the trust account receipt for each payment be filed in Court for each payment by the close of the next business day after the payment.

(b) That Mr Achanfuo-Yeboah sell his 1994 model BMW sedan motor vehicle on or before 21 April 2017 and deposit the nett proceeds of such sale into the trust account of John O’Keefe, Solicitor, within two working days of the completion of the sale, and a copy of the trust account receipt for the deposit be filed in Court by the close of the next business day after the deposit.

2. That leave to given to Ben Aulich and Associates to withdraw the application under r 5538 of the Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT).

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.