Ayala v Poole

[2016] ACTSC 63

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

Ayala v Poole

Citation:

[2016] ACTSC 63

Hearing Date:

21 March 2016

DecisionDate:

21 March 2016

Before:

Walmsley AJ

Decision:

1.     The application and appeal is dismissed.

2.     The convictions and sentences of the Magistrates Court are confirmed.

3.    Jarome Ayala is directed to report to ACT Corrective Services at Eclipse House, 197 London Circuit, Canberra City by 4:30pm on 22 March 2016.

Catchwords:

APPEAL – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appeal from Magistrates Court – appeal against conviction – common assault – Mackenzie friend – whether the appellant ought to be permitted to withdraw pleas of guilty – no miscarriage of justice – appeal dismissed

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), s 26

Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT), s 22

Legal Aid Act 1977 (ACT), s 92

Cases Cited:

Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132

Norveska v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) [2007] NSWCCA 158

R v Gomez [2007] ACTCA 21; 1 ACTR 145

Parties:

Jarome Ayala (Appellant)

Sylvia Rachel Poole (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel

Mr J Ayala (Self-represented) assisted by Mr D Emmerson (Appellant)

Mr K Lee (Respondent)

Solicitors

Jarome Ayala (Self-represented) (Appellant)

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number:

SCA 13 of 2015

Decision under appeal: 

Court/Tribunal:             ACT Magistrates Court

Before:  Magistrate Cook

Date of Decision:         2 February 2015

Case Title:  Poole v Ayala

File Numbers:               CC 14/11582 and CC 14/11583

WALMSLEY AJ:

1. In this appeal, the issue is whether the appellant ought to be permitted to withdraw his pleas of guilty to two counts of common assault.

1. On 26 November 2014, in the ACT Magistrates Court, the appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of common assault, contrary to s 26 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) (the Crimes Act). He was sentenced on 2 February 2015. The Magistrate recorded convictions and imposed sentences based on, among other things, an amended statement of agreed facts.

1. The appellant appealed against his convictions. He told me that he had no desire to appeal against severity and that he would undergo the remainder of his sentence if I dismissed his application. He gave notice that he proposed to adduce further evidence, including witness statements, affidavits and photographs.

1. The appellant’s grounds of appeal were stated as follows:

That the appellant is not guilty and wishes to reverse his plea of guilt, and that he was compelled to enter a plea of guilt whilst under extreme duress in exchange for a reduction in the severity of mildly higher charges of which he is also not guilty.

1. According to the amended statement of facts, on 25 June 2014, the victim, who had been in a relationship with the appellant, told him that she was leaving him. They argued and he seized her upper arms and squeezed them, lifted her up, threw her on a bed and placed a knee on her chest, causing her to lose her breath. Those facts are said to constitute the first assault.