Police v Williams

[2015] SASCFC 129

Supreme Court of South Australia

(Full Court)

POLICE v WILLIAMS

[2015] SASCFC 129

Judgment of The Full Court

(The Honourable Chief Justice Kourakis, The Honourable Acting Chief Justice Gray and The Honourable Justice Stanley)

9 September 2015

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES - RIGHT OF APPEAL - WHEN APPEAL LIES - FROM INTERLOCUTORY DECISIONS - GENERALLY

CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PROCEDURE - MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS - SOUTH AUSTRALIA

The respondent was convicted in the Magistrates Court for three driving offences and one offence of resist a member of the police force. During the pursuit the Police approached the respondent in a car in the backyard of private residential premises.

The respondent appealed to a single Judge of this court who allowed the appeal on the grounds that he was not satisfied that the identification evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt the respondent had committed the offences. In the process of his ruling the Judge excluded the evidence of the police officers while they were on the private residential premises, the Judge found that the police officers had no implied licence to enter the premises.

The appellant appeals only the finding of the single Judge to exclude the evidence on the grounds that no implied licence to enter the private residential premises existed. The order of acquittal is not appealed.

Held per Kourakis CJ (Gray and Stanley JJ agreeing):

1. The appeal was brought to the Supreme Court against the final orders of conviction against the respondent. The appeal was not brought against an “interlocutory judgment” pursuant to s 42 of the Magistrates Court Act 1991.

2.     The appeal is incompetent.

Magistrates Court Act 1991 (SA) s 3, s 42; Supreme Court Act 1935 (SA) s 50, referred to.
Legal Practitioners Complaints Committee v A Practitioner (1987) 46 SASR 126, considered.

POLICE v WILLIAMS
[2015] SASCFC 129

Full Court:  Kourakis CJ, Gray ACJ and Stanley JJ

1. KOURAKIS CJ:    This is an application for permission to appeal against the decision of a Judge of this Court on a Magistrates Appeal. The Judge allowed the respondent’s appeal against his convictions.  The respondent, Mr Williams, was convicted in the Magistrates Court of:

   ·Count 1 – driving a motor vehicle without consent;

   ·Count 2 – driving a motor vehicle whilst disqualified;

   ·Count 3 – aggravated driving dangerously to escape police pursuit;

   ·Count 4 – resist a member of the police force in the execution of his duty.

2. The Judge allowed the appeal on the first three counts because on a review of the evidence he was not satisfied that the identification evidence of the police officers proved beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Williams was the driver.  The prosecution case on the resist arrest charge was that the police found Williams in a car in the back yard of private residential premises.  They yelled at him to come out but did not speak words of arrest.  Mr Williams, not surprisingly, decided not to alight from the car because two…