Law v Woolfe - [2019] WASC 193

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION:   LAW -v- WOOLFE [2019] WASC 193
CORAM:   DERRICK J
HEARD:   5 JUNE 2019
DELIVERED          :   5 JUNE 2019
PUBLISHED           :   6 JUNE 2019
FILE NO/S:   SJA 1063 of 2019
BETWEEN:   MITCHELL KENNETH LAW
Appellant
AND
LUKE WOOLFE
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   MAGISTRATE E C A DE VRIES
File Number             :   PE 60887/2018 - PE 60895/2018

Catchwords:

Plea of guilty to offence by unrepresented accused – Plea of guilty rendered accused liable to be sentenced for offences for which he had been placed on a community based order – Accused sentenced to terms of immediate imprisonment for offences for which he had been placed on community based order - Failure by magistrate to inform accused that his plea of guilty had rendered him liable to be sentenced for offences for which he had been placed on community based order – Failure by magistrate to inform accused of his right to obtain legal advice and representation or of his right to seek a reasonable adjournment to obtain legal advice and representation – Failure by magistrate to require prosecutor to read facts of offence to which accused had pleaded guilty – Failure by magistrate to give accused opportunity to dispute or comment upon facts of offence to which he had pleaded guilty - Failure by magistrate to require prosecutor to read facts of offences for which accused had been sentenced to community based order so as to give accused opportunity to comment upon facts - Failure by magistrate to give accused opportunity to dispute or comment upon oral report delivered by representative of Adult Community Corrections

Failure by magistrate to take into account time spent in custody by accused

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA)
Criminal Code (WA)
Criminal Procedure Act 2004 (WA)
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005 (WA)
Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973 (WA)
Sentencing Act 1995 (WA)

Result:

Application for an extension of time granted
Application for leave to appeal allowed
Appeal allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	Ms N R Sinton
Respondent	:	Mr B M Murray

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Legal Aid (WA)
Respondent	:	Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)

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

Eastough v The State of Western Australia [No 2] [2010] WASCA 88
Gable v Nardini [2010] WASC 321; (2010) 56 MVR 551
Goodwin v The State of Western Australia [2017] WASCA 184
MJS v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 112
Narkle v Hamilton [2008] WASCA 31
Samuels v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 193; (2005) 30 WAR 473
Saylor v Shephard [2010] WASC 94

DERRICK J:

(This judgment was delivered extemporaneously and has been edited from the transcript)

Introduction

On 1 April 2019 the appellant was sentenced in the Magistrates Court to a total of 7 months imprisonment for eight offences of possessing property that was reasonably suspected to be stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained contrary to s 417(1)…

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 Law v Woolfe

Details

AGLC: Law v Woolfe [2019] WASC 193
Case: [2019] WASC 193
Decision Date: 6 JUNE 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Law v Woolfe, the appellant, Mr Law, appealed against his conviction and sentence imposed by the Local Court. Mr Law had pleaded guilty to charges while unrepresented and was sentenced to terms of immediate imprisonment for offences for which he had previously been placed on a community-based order. The central issue before the court was whether the magistrate's failure to properly inform Mr Law of the consequences of his guilty plea, his rights, and the facts of the offence warranted an appeal against his conviction and sentence.

The court examined whether the magistrate's omissions amounted to a significant procedural error that could affect the fairness of the trial. Key to the decision was whether the magistrate's failure to inform Mr Law of the potential consequences of his guilty plea, his right to legal advice, and the opportunity to dispute the facts presented, rendered the trial unfair. The court noted that the magistrate did not require the prosecutor to read out the facts of the offence to which Mr Law had pleaded guilty nor did the magistrate provide an opportunity for Mr Law to dispute or comment on those facts. Additionally, the magistrate did not require the prosecutor to read the facts of the offences for which Mr Law had been sentenced to a community-based order, nor did the magistrate give Mr Law an opportunity to comment on the facts or dispute the oral report from Adult Community Corrections.

The court found that the magistrate's failure to properly inform Mr Law and to allow him to exercise his rights constituted a significant procedural error, leading to an unfair trial. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a re-trial. Furthermore, the court directed that Mr Law be given credit for time already spent in custody.

Orders