Kola v The Queen
[2021] HCASL 168
KOLA
v
THE QUEEN
[2021] HCASL 168
A22/2020
The applicant requires an extension of time in which to seek special leave to appeal from a judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of South Australia (Kourakis CJ, Stanley and Hughes JJ) which allowed the applicant's appeal against sentence on the basis, by majority (Stanley and Hughes JJ, Kourakis CJ dissenting), that he was not a "serious repeat offender" within the meaning of s 20B of the Criminal Law (Sentencing) Act 1988 (SA). The applicant's contention that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive was unanimously rejected by the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court of Criminal Appeal set aside the non-parole period imposed by the District Court of South Australia and imposed a new non‑parole period.
There is no point in granting an extension of time. The applicant identifies no question of principle which it would be in the interests of justice for this Court to consider and there is no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Criminal Appeal's judgment. An appeal to this Court would not enjoy sufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave.
On 12 May 2021, the applicant applied for leave to amend his application for special leave initially filed on 3 December 2020 to raise an additional proposed ground of appeal, namely that the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal should be set aside because of an apprehension of bias. The applicant requires an extension of time to file the amended application, but it would be futile to grant the extension. The allegation is raised for the first time in this Court (rather than the original jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeal) and on disputed questions of fact which this Court cannot determine.
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 applications.
M.M. Gordon J.J. Edelman 2 September 2021
0
0