Monagle v Brown

[2008] QDC 165

[2008] QDC 165

DISTRICT COURT
APPELLATE JURISDICTION

JUDGE FORDE

No 548 of 2008

BENEDICT JOHN MONAGLE	Appellant
and
NICOLA JANE BROWN	Respondent
BRISBANE ..DATE 27/03/2008

ORDER
HIS HONOUR: This is an application to extend the time for an

1

appeal filed on the 12th of March 2008 which was some eight

months out of time.

On an application of this nature the onus is upon the

applicant to show, one, that there is some satisfactory	10
explanation for the delay and two, that there is some merit in
the appeal. See R v Tate (1999) 2 Queensland Reports 667 at
668.
The explanation given for the delay was that the applicant,	20
who appeals against the sentence by the learned magistrate, given on 13th of June 2007, was that the appeal papers were filled in and given to a unit officer at the prison and she indicated they would be faxed to Legal Aid which they were
not. Subsequent inquiries were made and a second form was	30
filled in and the applicant was told the Courts would not accept them, so they were then sent to a Ms Holman at Legal Aid. These events occurred over the relevant period of time.
In relation to the appeal itself, as appears from the exhibit	40
handed up to me which was the warrant and an attachment,
Exhibit 4, the applicant is to serve a total of some five
years three months and five days commencing on 30th September
2004.
50

The applicant had been sentenced on the 30th of June 2004 to 18 months' imprisonment, he had served 98 days, with three years' imprisonment on the 5th of July 2005 for robbery with violence and wilful damage and then before the learned 2 ORDER 60

1

Magistrate an 18 month term of imprisonment head sentence. but one year of the sentence.

Prima facie there is some merit in the appeal as the	10
eligibility date for parole was set by the Magistrate for 21st
of October 2009. The actual release date or full time release
date is the 21st of October 2010. Therefore there is some
merit in the appeal which could be considered viable and I am
otherwise satisfied that given that aspect that the lapse of	20
time is not an insuperable obstacle to the applicant given his explanation.
Therefore, the time in which to appeal is extended to 12th
March 2008.	30

-----

40

50

3 ORDER 60