Ada v Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

In the Supreme Court of Western Australia, the appellant, Ada, appealed against the decision of the Magistrates Court not to grant her a spent conviction order. The appellant was convicted of assaulting a public officer in a hospital who was administering a sedative to her. The appellant had become intoxicated with alcohol after receiving a distressing telephone call from her ex-husband and subsequently became so emotionally distressed that the police took her to a hospital. The appellant bit and scratched a security officer while he was restraining her. The appellant was fined $1,000 and no spent conviction order was made. The appellant sought leave to appeal against the decision not to make a spent conviction order and to adduce evidence of the adverse impact of the conviction on her employment prospects. The court found that the appeal had a reasonable prospect of success and allowed leave to appeal. The court found that the appellant is unlikely to commit such an offence again, the offence was not trivial, and the appellant is of good character. The court found that the learned Magistrate erred in the exercise of her discretion in not granting a spent conviction order. The highly unusual extenuating circumstances in which the offending occurred, the excellent antecedents of the appellant, and the significant impact that the conviction will have on the appellant supported the granting of a spent conviction. Leave to appeal was granted on ground one and the appeal was allowed. The order of the learned Magistrate was set aside and a spent conviction order was made.