Bollen v The Queen

[2000] HCATrans 19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S20 of 1999

B e t w e e n -

MARK ANDREW BOLLEN

Applicant

and

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Application for special leave to appeal

GAUDRON J
GUMMOW J
HAYNE J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT SYDNEY ON FRIDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2000, AT 10.37 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

MR R.D. ELLIS:   I appear for the respondent.  (instructed by S.E. O’Connor, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW))

GAUDRON J:   Yes, Mr Ellis, we need not trouble you.

The applicant, who relies on his written submissions, seeks an extension of time and also seeks special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales dismissing his appeal against a conviction for manslaughter.  Once the jury found, as it clearly did, that the applicant was not acting in self-defence, the argument which he now seeks to make, namely that he was armed for the purposes of self‑defence, must fall to the ground.  Accordingly, and substantially for the reasons given by Acting Justice Graham in the Court of Criminal Appeal, there has been no miscarriage of justice.  In the circumstances, the appropriate order is the application for leave to extend time be refused.  It is so ordered.

The Court will adjourn briefly to reconstitute.

AT 10.38 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED