Devey v The Queen

The applicant, Mr. Devey, applied to the court for an extension of time to seek leave to appeal against his sentence. The dispute arose after Mr. Devey was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 7 years and 6 months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 6 months. He sought the extension of time on the basis that his legal representation had been inadequate, and he had not been properly advised of his right to appeal. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia.

The legal issues before the court were whether the judge had erred in failing to apply the principles outlined in Bugmy v The Queen and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the proposed grounds of appeal were reasonably arguable and whether it was futile to grant an extension of time due to the unsatisfactory reasons for the delay.

The court found that it was not reasonably arguable that the judge had erred in failing to apply the principles from Bugmy v The Queen. The court further held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive. The proposed grounds of appeal were not reasonably arguable, and it was futile to grant an extension of time due to the unsatisfactory reasons for the delay. Consequently, the application for an extension of time was refused.

No further orders were made by the court.