Donohue v The Queen

DONOHUE
v
THE QUEEN
[2020] HCASL 130
M23/2020

The applicant requires an extension of time in which to seek special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria (Priest and Beach JJA) dismissing an application for an extension of time in which to seek leave to appeal against his conviction following a trial in the County Court of Victoria of 12 charges of making a false document, three charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice and four charges of perjury, for which a total effective sentence of four years and five months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years and nine months had been imposed.
It would be futile to grant the extension of time which is sought. The applicant identifies no question of principle which it would be in the interests of justice for this Court to consider and no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's judgment. An appeal to this Court would enjoy no prospect of success.
Pursuant to r 41.08.1 of the High Court Rules 2004 (Cth), we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

G.A.A Nettle M.M Gordon

12 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Donohue v The Queen, the applicant sought an extension of time to appeal a decision from the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The Court of Appeal had dismissed the applicant's request for an extension to seek leave to appeal against a conviction from the County Court of Victoria. The conviction stemmed from charges of making false documents, attempting to pervert the course of justice, and perjury, resulting in a sentence of four years and five months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of two years and nine months. The High Court was tasked with determining whether to grant an extension of time for the applicant to seek special leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal.

The primary legal issue for the High Court to consider was whether the extension of time sought by the applicant would be futile, as argued by the respondent. The Court had to assess whether there were any questions of principle that would warrant consideration by the Court and whether the correctness of the Court of Appeal's judgment could be reasonably doubted. Additionally, the Court needed to determine if an appeal to the High Court had any prospect of success.

The High Court found that the application for an extension of time was indeed futile. The Court noted that the applicant had not identified any question of principle that would be in the interests of justice for the Court to consider. Furthermore, the Court was not persuaded that there was any reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's judgment. Given these findings, the High Court concluded that an appeal to the Court would have no prospect of success. Consequently, the Court dismissed the application for an extension of time, and the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign, and seal an order to that effect.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established