Garlett v The Queen

[1988] HCATrans 149

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry

Perth No P30 of 1987

B e t w e e n -

SYDNEY PATRICK GARLETT

Applicant

and

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Application for special

leave to appeal

MASON CJ

WILSON J

BRENNAi~ J
TOOHEY J

Garlett

GAUDRON J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 4 AUGUST 1988, AT 10.53 AM:

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

C1Tl2/l/MB 1 4/8/88

MR H.A. WALLWORK, QC:  May it please the Court, I appear with

MR B.G. HILLEN, for the applicant in this matter.

(instructed by the Aboriginal Legal Service of

Western Australia)

MR M.J. MURRAY, QC: If it please Your Honours, I appear

for the respondent with my learned friend,

MR L. ROBBINS. (instructed by the Crown Solicitor

for Western Australia)

MASON CJ:	Mr Wallwork.
MR WALLWORK:	If it please Your Honours I hand up eight copies

of the applicant's submissions.

MASON CJ: 

Thank you.

MR WALLWORK: 

Your Honours, in this case, as you know, the

applicant was charged with - that he stole with actual
violence a sum of money and that at the time he ..

was armed with a dangerous weapon, namely, a knife.
The facts were that he had held a knife at the right

shoulder of the taxi-driver behind whom he was

sitting in a taxi. The taxi-driver thought that

he told him to stop whereas, in fact, the applicant

later told the police on the Crown case that he had

said, "Stop, I want the money", or words to that

effect.

The position was that the taxi-driver got out of the taxi, saw the man standing there with a knife,

was told to run off down the street and move

backwards, apparently, across the road. The applicant

got into the taxi and drove off.  He only went about

half a mile and he was apprehended in the vehicle
by two police officers whom the taxi-driver had

called.  Your Honours, the Crown case was that the

applicant had driven off in a taxi after ordering the taxi-driver out of the taxi and at the bottom of page 1 of the submissions the Crown evidence is

set out. In that the Crown case was that he told

the police:

All I wanted was some money ... I told him to get out and give me the money. I told him to get out and to walk up the

road.

In paragraph 3: the Crown contention was that the relevant time of the offence was when the applicant drove the taxi away. That appears at

pages 95, 96 and 100 of the appeal papers. The

learned trial judge took the view - and I referring to paragraph 3 of the outline of submissions - that the Crown evidence, if accepted, revealed no more

than that the accused took possession of the taxi

in the hope and, possibly, the belief that it contained

money.

ClT12/2/MB	2
Garlett

MR WALLWORK (continuing):  At best he thought it could be

said that…