Dickson v The Queen Dickson v The Queen
[2019] HCASL 187
DICKSON
v
THE QUEEN
DICKSON
v
THE QUEEN
[2019] HCASL 187
S51/2019
S52/2019
On 10 June 2016, the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Schmidt and Wilson JJ, Macfarlan JA agreeing) dismissed the applicant's appeal against conviction and allowed a Crown appeal against sentence following the applicant's conviction of one count of conspiracy to dishonestly cause a loss, or to dishonestly cause a risk of loss, to the Commonwealth contrary to s 135.4(5) of the Criminal Code (Cth) and one count of conspiracy to deal with property of a value of $1 million or more believing it to be the proceeds of crime, contrary to ss 11.5(1) and 400.3(1) of the Criminal Code. An application for special leave to appeal was refused by Bell and Keane JJ: Dickson v The Queen [2016] HCATrans 307.
By notice of motion dated 20 November 2017, the applicant applied to the Court of Criminal Appeal to re-open the appeal, relying on fresh grounds and effectively submitting that the Court had failed to determine "amended ground 7" of his appeal. On 27 August 2018, the Court dismissed the application: Dickson v The Queen [No 2] [2018] NSWCCA 183. Then, on 10 September 2018, the applicant applied to set aside or vary the orders of 27 August 2018. That application was dismissed by the Court of Criminal Appeal on 26 October 2018: Dickson v The Queen [No 3] [2018] NSWCCA 242.
The applicant applies for special leave to appeal against the decision of 27 August 2018 (in Matter S51 of 2019) and against the decision of 26 October 2018 (in Matter S52 of 2019). The applicant maintains the contention that the Court of Criminal Appeal failed to exercise its jurisdiction by failing to determine amended ground 7.
The applicant requires an extension of time within which to file each application for special leave to appeal. The applicant has not identified a question of principle of general importance sufficient to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal and otherwise advances no arguable ground of appeal against the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court of Criminal Appeal applied settled and established authority to the particular facts. Further, it is not otherwise in the interests of justice to grant special leave to appeal. The applicant's senior counsel had accepted at the 2016 hearing of the applicant's appeal that the arguments concerning amended ground 7 were encompassed by another ground (ground 2), which was addressed by the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Neither appeal to this Court would enjoy any prospect of success. It would therefore be futile to grant the extensions that are sought. Special leave should be refused.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal orders dismissing each application.
G.A.A Nettle M.M Gordon 12 June 2019
3
3
0