Keli Lane v Regina - [2013] NSWSC 146

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Keli LANE v Regina [2013] NSWSC 146
Hearing dates: Thursday 28 February 2013
Decision date: 01 March 2013
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Hoeben CJ at CL
Decision:
Bail refused

Catchwords: BAIL - conviction for murder - appeal pending in Court of Criminal Appeal - s30AA Bail Act 1978 - bail refused.
Legislation Cited: Bail Act 1978 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Carney v R; Cambey v R [2011] NSWCCA 223
R v Antoun [2005] NSWCCA 270
R v Rugari [2001] NSWCCA 64; 122 A Crim R 1
R v Kanaan [2005] NSWCCA 385; 64 NSWLR 527
R v Wilson (1994) 34 NSWLR 1
United Mexican States v Cabal & Ors [2001] HCA 61; 209 CLR 165
Wood v R [2012] NSWCCA 21
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Keli Lane - Applicant
Regina - Respondent Crown
Representation: Counsel:
Mr W Terracini SC/Mr J Trevallion - Applicant
Ms JA Girdham SC/Mr H Baker - Respondent Crown
Solicitors:
Archbold Legal - Applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions - Respondent Crown

File Number(s): 2009/256171

JUDGMENT

HIS HONOUR:

Background

The applicant was tried before Whealy J and a jury on an indictment containing four counts: the murder of her newborn daughter Tegan, and three counts of perjury relating to false statements in affidavits, filed in the Equity Division of the Supreme Court in adoption proceedings for two of her children. The trial commenced on 9 August 2010 and concluded on 13 December 2010 with verdicts of guilty on each count except that in relation to the perjury counts, the applicant was found guilty of the alternate count of "false swearing". The applicant was sentenced on 15 April 2011 as follows:

For each of the "false swearing" counts - a fixed term of imprisonment for 9 months, to date from 13 December 2010.

For the count of murder, imprisonment with a non-parole period of 13 years and 5 months, to date from 13 December 2010 and to expire on 12 May 2024, with a balance of term of 4 years and 7 months, to expire 11 December 2028.

The total effective sentence was that imposed for the murder charge, since the other sentences were entirely subsumed in that sentence. The earliest date on which the applicant can be released to parole is 12 May 2024.

By Notice of Appeal and Notice of Application for Leave to Appeal (Conviction only) dated 20 December 2012 the applicant has notified eight grounds of appeal. Written submissions have been filed on behalf of the applicant in support of her appeal and in support of her application for bail. It is anticipated that the appeal will be listed for hearing in July of this year.

Application for Bail

The applicant has applied for bail, pending the outcome of her appeal. That application was heard by the Court on 28 February 2013. Bail was refused, with reasons to be handed down at 12pm 1 March 2013. These are the reasons for the refusal…

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 Keli Lane v Regina

Details

AGLC: Keli Lane v Regina [2013] NSWSC 146
Case: [2013] NSWSC 146
Decision Date: 01 March 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Keli Lane, sought bail pending an appeal against his conviction for murder in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The application was heard by the Court of Appeal, which included Justices Gotterson, Byrne, and Muir. The primary legal issue was whether the applicant met the threshold criteria under section 30AA of the Bail Act 1978 for bail pending appeal. This section requires the court to consider whether the applicant is likely to be acquitted, and if not, whether the appeal is likely to succeed to the extent that it would be in the interests of justice to grant bail.

The court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both the prosecution and the applicant. It found that the applicant had not established that he was likely to be acquitted. The court also considered the seriousness of the offence, the circumstances in which the crime was committed, and the risk that the applicant would reoffend if released on bail. The court concluded that the appeal was not likely to succeed to an extent that would make it just and equitable to grant bail. The court emphasised the importance of public safety and the need to prevent reoffending, especially given the gravity of the offence. Consequently, the court refused the application for bail.

The court's decision was based on a careful assessment of the evidence and the applicable legal principles. It found that the applicant had not met the threshold criteria for bail pending appeal. The court's refusal of bail was consistent with the principles set out in relevant case law and statutory provisions. The applicant's application for special leave to appeal to the High Court was subsequently dismissed.

Orders