Lance v Weston - [2014] WASCA 62

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)

CITATION: LANCE -v- WESTON [2014] WASCA 62

CORAM: PULLIN JA
BUSS JA
MAZZA JA

HEARD: 4 NOVEMBER 2013

DELIVERED : 25 MARCH 2014

FILE NO/S: CACR 34 of 2013

BETWEEN: ROBERT LANCE
Appellant
AND
LEE WESTON
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :  SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram  :McKECHNIE J
File No  :SJA 1142 of 2012

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Appeal against dismissal of single judge appeal - Whether substantial miscarriage of justice demonstrated - Appeal dismissed

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), pt 2 div 1, div 2, div 3, s 6, s 7(1), s 8, s 9, s 10, s 14(2)
Criminal Code (WA), s 22, s 24, s 32, s 70A(2)
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA), pt 14, r 60, r 63, r 65

Result:

Extension of time to appeal granted
Leave to appeal in respect of grounds 2 to 6 refused
Appeal dismissed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: Mr T C Russell

Solicitors:

Appellant: In person
Respondent: State Solicitor for Western Australia

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

Pengelly v Shire of Serpentine [2014] WASCA 5
Vella v The State of Western Australia [2006] WASCA 129
Wilson v McDonald [2009] WASCA 39
Windie v The State of Western Australia [2012] WASCA 61

REASONS OF THE COURT: The appellant seeks an extension of time to appeal pursuant to pt 2 div 3 of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) (CAA). The appellant has, at all stages of the proceedings, represented himself.
The appellant was charged in the Magistrates Court with trespassing on the Subiaco Library without lawful excuse, contrary to s 70A(2) of the Criminal Code (WA). Initially, he pleaded not guilty, but on 2 November 2012, the scheduled date of his trial, he changed his plea to guilty. As a consequence he was convicted and fined $250. He appealed his conviction to a single judge of the Supreme Court. On 18 January 2013, McKechnie J refused leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal without oral submissions from the parties. The appellant now appeals to this court against that decision. He filed his appeal notice seven days out of time. In light of the short delay and the absence of prejudice to the respondent, we would grant the extension of time.

Factual background

At about 12.05 pm on 24 August 2012, the appellant was sitting at a desk using his personal computer at the Subiaco Library. There were other members of the public inside the library at the time. Library staff received a complaint that the appellant was being verbally abusive towards some of these people. The appellant was approached by library staff who asked him to leave the premises. It appears from what he said to the magistrate during the course of the proceedings on 2 November 2012 that he thought he had done nothing wrong and was, in fact, being harassed by…

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 Lance v Weston

Details

AGLC: Lance v Weston [2014] WASCA 62
Case: [2014] WASCA 62
Decision Date: 25 MARCH 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Lance v Weston involved an appeal by the respondent, Lance, against a decision by a single judge of the Federal Court of Australia, who dismissed his appeal against conviction and sentence. The conviction and sentence arose from an offence under the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). The single judge dismissed the appeal on the basis that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice. Lance sought to appeal against the dismissal of his single judge appeal, contending that the judge had erred in finding that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred.

The legal issue before the court was whether the single judge had erred in his determination that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred. Lance argued that the single judge had failed to properly consider the effect of certain evidence on the overall reliability of the case against him. The court was required to consider whether the single judge's decision was open to him, and whether there was any error of law that warranted the appeal being allowed.

The court held that the single judge's decision was open to him, and that there was no error of law that warranted the appeal being allowed. The court found that the single judge had considered all relevant evidence and had properly exercised his discretion in finding that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred. The court held that the evidence relied upon by Lance did not have a material effect on the overall reliability of the case against him. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Orders