Okoli v The Queen

[2021] WASCA 41

JURISDICTION     :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

TITLE OF COURT  :   THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)

CITATION:   OKOLI -v- THE QUEEN [2021] WASCA 41

CORAM:   BUSS P

MAZZA JA

MITCHELL JA

HEARD:   3 MARCH 2021

DELIVERED          :   3 MARCH 2021

FILE NO/S:   CACR 119 of 2018

BETWEEN:   EMEKA PAUL OKOLI

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction              :   SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram:   HALL J

File Number            :   INS 240 of 2017

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Bail - Application for bail pending the determination of an application to the High Court for special leave to appeal - Special leave refused - Application for bail moot

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA)

Result:

Application for bail dismissed

Category:    B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	In Person
Respondent	:	Mr N J Bradshaw

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	In Person
Respondent	:	Director of Prosecutions (Cth)

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

Okoli v The Queen [2019] WASCA 91

Okoli v The Queen [2021] HCASL 11

Ponnambalam v The State of Western Australia [2015] WASCA 185

Shah v The Queen [2019] WASCA 110

YNT v The State of Western Australia [2020] WASCA 80

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:

1. The appellant was convicted, following an 8 day trial in the Supreme Court of Western Australia, of one count of importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug, namely methamphetamine, contrary to s 307.1(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth).

2. The appellant appealed to this court against his conviction.

3. On 28 June 2019, the appellant's appeal against conviction was dismissed.  See Okoli v The Queen.[1]

   [1] Okoli v The Queen [2019] WASCA 91.

4. On 1 July 2019, the Acting Court of Appeal Registrar signed a certificate of conclusion of criminal appeal in relation to the appellant's appeal against conviction.

5. The Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) provides for but one appeal against conviction (with leave) to this court and an appellant is not entitled to commence multiple appeals against the same decision. See Ponnambalam v The State of Western Australia;[2] Shah v The Queen[3] and YNT v The State of Western Australia.[4]

   [2] Ponnambalam v The State of Western Australia [2015] WASCA 185 [17] ‑ [32].

   [3] Shah v The Queen [2019] WASCA 110 [22].

   [4] YNT v The State of Western Australia [2020] WASCA 80 [31].

6. So, in the present case, the appellant having appealed to this court against his conviction and this court having dismissed his appeal, the appellant is not entitled to appeal again to this court against his conviction.

7. On 21 September 2020, the appellant made an application to the High Court of Australia for special leave to appeal against this court's judgment dismissing his appeal against conviction.

8. On 29 January 2021, the appellant filed an application in this court for bail pending the final determination, in essence, of his application to the High Court for special leave to appeal and, if special leave be granted, the appeal.

9. On 29 January 2021, Registrar Gilich made programming orders for the filing and service of written submissions in relation to the appellant's application for bail.

10. On 10 February 2021, the High Court refused to grant the appellant special leave to appeal and, that being so, decided that it would be futile to grant the extension of time that was required for the application for special leave to proceed.  See Okoli v The Queen.[5]

    [5] Okoli v The Queen [2021] HCASL 11.

11. The appellant's application for bail is moot because the High Court has dismissed his application for special leave to appeal.

12. In the circumstances, the appropriate order is that the appellant's application for bail dated 29 January 2021 is dismissed.

I certify that the preceding paragraph(s) comprise the reasons for decision of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

AHM

Research Associate to the Hon President Buss

5 MARCH 2021