Johnson v Williams - [2022] WASC 78

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION:   JOHNSON -v- WILLIAMS [2022] WASC 78
CORAM:   SOLOMON J
HEARD:   4 FEBRUARY 2022
DELIVERED          :   14 MARCH 2022
PUBLISHED           :   15 MARCH 2022
FILE NO/S:   SJA 1054 of 2021
BETWEEN:   ANTHONY DESMOND JOHNSON
Appellant
AND
SHANE JOHN WILLIAMS
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
For File No:   SJA 1054 of 2021
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   JUSTICES OF THE PEACE
File Number            :   HC 570 of 2008

Catchwords:

Appeal from the Magistrates Court at Halls Creek - Original decision made by Justices of the Peace in Halls Creek permanently disqualifying the appellant from driving - Manifestly excessive 'life' disqualification - 13 year delay in bringing appeal - Appeal against sentence - Leave to grant appeal - Exceptional circumstances - Miscarriage of justice

Legislation:

Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA), Sch 1
Road Traffic (Authorisation to Drive) Act 2008 (WA), s 24, s 24(10)
Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA) (as at 15 March 2008), s 67(2), s 67(2)(a), s 67(3), s 78, s 105
Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA) (as at 20 March 2009), s 49(1)(a), s 49(3)(c), s 49
Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA) (as at 23 April 2012), s 49
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 37

Result:

Application for extension of time to appeal granted
Appeal allowed
Substituted decision ordered

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	S H King
Respondent	:	S Olynyk

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Legal Aid - Perth - Criminal Appeals
Respondent	:	State Solicitor's Office

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

Bardsley v The Queen [2004] WASCA 251; (2004) 29 WAR 338
BPR v The State of Western Australia [2007] WASCA 41
City of Canning v Avon Capital Estates (Australia) Ltd [2009] WASCA 120
Edwards v Simpson [2018] WASCA 177; (2018) 86 MVR 141
EXF v Western Australia [2015] WASCA 118
Jackamarra v Orr [2003] WASCA 278; (2003) 40 MVR 132
Petrusic v State of Western Australia [2020] WASCA 62
Tubbs v Pomykaj [2009] WASC 379
Wimbridge v Western Australia [2009] WASCA 196

SOLOMON J:

Overview

This matter has all the hallmarks of the unremarkable. Even its title, Johnson v Williams, is suggestive of a conventional dispute, uncomplicated by the potential diversity of human experiences. It is an appeal arising from a conviction under the Road Traffic Act 1974 (WA) (RTA); one of many appeals arising from the multitude of offences under that legislation that come before the Magistrates Court.[1]
[1] For instance, in 2021, 94 appeals from the Magistrates Court were heard by this court. Of those, 20, or 21%, related to matters where at least one charge arose pursuant to the RTA.
The apparent banality of that context belies its significance and the gulf in power and fortune that lies between 'Mr Johnson' and 'Mr Williams'.
Mr Johnson is an Indigenous Australian born in 1964 in the remote town of Halls Creek in the East Kimberly region at the northern end of the Canning Stock route which runs 1,850…

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 Johnson v Williams

Details

AGLC: Johnson v Williams [2022] WASC 78
Case: [2022] WASC 78
Decision Date: 15 MARCH 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Johnson v Williams, the appellant, Johnson, appealed against a decision of the Magistrates Court at Halls Creek. The original decision was made by Justices of the Peace in Halls Creek and involved a permanent disqualification from driving, referred to as a 'life' disqualification. The appeal was brought 13 years after the initial sentence was imposed, raising concerns about the delay and the potential for a miscarriage of justice.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the appellant's appeal, despite being brought 13 years after the sentence, should be considered under the doctrine of exceptional circumstances. This doctrine allows for the grant of leave to appeal in cases where there has been a significant delay in bringing the appeal, but where it can be demonstrated that there is a reasonable likelihood of a miscarriage of justice. The court was also required to consider whether the original sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court found that the original 'life' disqualification was indeed manifestly excessive, particularly given the appellant's clean driving record and the circumstances of the offence. The significant delay in bringing the appeal was addressed by the doctrine of exceptional circumstances, which the court determined applied in this case. The appellant demonstrated that the delay was due to a combination of factors, including health issues and a lack of legal representation, which contributed to the potential for a miscarriage of justice.

Ultimately, the court granted leave to appeal and found that the original sentence was manifestly excessive. The appellant's 'life' disqualification was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Magistrates Court for reconsideration of an appropriate sentence. This decision underscores the importance of the doctrine of exceptional circumstances in ensuring that justice is not unduly delayed and that manifestly excessive sentences are corrected.

Orders