Culleton v McAlpine - [2020] WASC 243

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION:   CULLETON -v- McALPINE [2020] WASC 243
CORAM:   SMITH J
HEARD:   ON THE PAPERS
DELIVERED          :   26 JUNE 2020
FILE NO/S:   SJA 1113 of 2018
BETWEEN:   RODNEY NORMAN CULLETON
Appellant

AND

DAVID LEA McALPINE
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   MAGISTRATE D P SCADDEN
File Number            :   NG 842 of 2015

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Appeal against conviction - Single judge appeal - Grounds of appeal had no reasonable prospects of success - Leave refused

Legislation:

Commonwealth Constitution (Cth), s 42, s 75(v)
Constitution Act 1889 (WA), s 2(3)
Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 2, s 7(1), s 9(1), s 9(2), s 10(2)
Criminal Code (WA), s 378
Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), s 20(3)(a), s 23, cl (3)(2)(a)
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA), r 60, r 63
Interpretation Act 1984 (WA), s 24
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA), s 5, sch 1 cl 4, sch 3, s 36
Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 (Cth)
Supreme Court Act 1935 (WA), s 13, s 16

Result:

Application in the appeal dismissed
Leave to appeal refused
Appeal dismissed

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	No appearance
Respondent	:	Ms R N Paljetak

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	No appearance
Respondent	:	State Solicitor for Western Australia

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Culleton v Elliot [2019] WASC 407
Hedley v Spivey [2012] WASCA 116
Hopes v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2017] WASCA 108
R v Theophanous [2003] VSCA 78; (2003) 141 A Crim R 216
Rayney v AW [2009] WASCA 203
Samuels v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 193; (2005) 30 WAR 473

SMITH J:

Procedural background and appellant's application filed in the appeal on 17 October 2019

On 7 September 2018, the appellant lodged an application for leave to appeal against a decision of the Magistrates Court on 30 August 2018 convicting the appellant of an offence of stealing a motor vehicle contrary to s 378 of the Criminal Code (WA), to the value of $27,000 between 13 March 2015 and 11 June 2015.
The programming of hearing the appellant's application for leave to appeal and the appeal were delayed because the appellant did not serve the application for leave to appeal on the respondent until 20 September 2019.[1]
[1] Service certificate, filed 20 September 2019.
On 17 October 2019, the appellant filed an application in the appeal. On 21 November 2019, the Principal Registrar made an order pursuant to rules 60 and 63 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA) that:
(a)the appellant's application lodged on 17 October 2019 in the appeal and the appellant's application for leave to appeal were to be listed for hearing with the appeal; and
(b)required the appellant to lodge a written outline of submissions in support of the applications and the appeal, not less than six weeks before the hearing (5 May 2020).
The applications and the appeal were listed for hearing on 17 June 2020. Despite repeated…

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.

Continue reading Culleton v McAlpine

Details

AGLC: Culleton v McAlpine [2020] WASC 243
Case: [2020] WASC 243
Decision Date: 26 JUNE 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Culleton v McAlpine was heard in the Court of Appeal, where the appellant sought to overturn a conviction handed down by a lower court. The appellant, Culleton, was found guilty of certain criminal offences and subsequently appealed the decision. The appeal was heard by a single judge, and the grounds upon which the appeal was based were assessed for their viability.

The central legal issues in this case revolved around the sufficiency of the evidence presented at the trial to support the conviction, as well as the legality of certain procedural aspects of the trial. The appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that there were errors in the procedures followed during the trial which impacted the fairness of the outcome.

The court found that the evidence was indeed sufficient to support the conviction, as it demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had indeed committed the offences for which they were charged. Furthermore, the court determined that any procedural errors did not significantly impact the fairness of the trial or the outcome. Consequently, the court held that the appeal did not have reasonable prospects of success and dismissed the application. As such, the original conviction was upheld, and no further orders were made.

Orders