Quinn v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions
Case
•
[2021] NSWCCA 294
•08 December 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Quinn v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions [2021] NSWCCA 294
[2021] NSWCCA 294
08 December 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter before the Court was an appeal against the decision of a single judge of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The appellant, Quinn, sought bail pending an application for leave to appeal against his sentence. The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions opposed the application. The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to determine whether it had jurisdiction to grant bail pending the application for leave to appeal against sentence. In particular, the Court needed to determine whether the application for leave to appeal against sentence was a “substantive proceeding” for the purposes of the Bail Act.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail. The Court found that the application for leave to appeal against sentence was not a “substantive proceeding” until the extension of time to file the application was granted. The Court held that there was no substantive proceeding pending until the extension was granted, and therefore, it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail. The Court further held that even if the application for leave to appeal against sentence was a substantive proceeding, Quinn had not demonstrated “special or exceptional circumstances” to support his release on bail. The Court held that the grounds for the proposed appeal needed to be stronger than merely arguable and needed to support release before the likely date of determination of the proposed appeal.
The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal and refused the application for bail. The Court held that Quinn had not demonstrated special or exceptional circumstances to support his release on bail pending the application for leave to appeal against sentence. The Court found that the grounds for the proposed appeal were not strong enough to support release on bail, and there was no substantive proceeding pending until the extension of time to file the application was granted. The Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail in these circumstances.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail. The Court found that the application for leave to appeal against sentence was not a “substantive proceeding” until the extension of time to file the application was granted. The Court held that there was no substantive proceeding pending until the extension was granted, and therefore, it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail. The Court further held that even if the application for leave to appeal against sentence was a substantive proceeding, Quinn had not demonstrated “special or exceptional circumstances” to support his release on bail. The Court held that the grounds for the proposed appeal needed to be stronger than merely arguable and needed to support release before the likely date of determination of the proposed appeal.
The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal and refused the application for bail. The Court held that Quinn had not demonstrated special or exceptional circumstances to support his release on bail pending the application for leave to appeal against sentence. The Court found that the grounds for the proposed appeal were not strong enough to support release on bail, and there was no substantive proceeding pending until the extension of time to file the application was granted. The Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to grant bail in these circumstances.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Jurisdiction
-
Bail
-
Grounds Reasonably Arguable
-
Special or Exceptional Circumstances
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
ZT v The King [2025] NSWCCA 116
Cases Citing This Decision
14
R v Ambler
[2022] NSWDC 627
R v Maricic; R v Derbas
[2022] NSWDC 16
R v Owen
[2021] NSWDC 680
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
5
Almaouie v R
[2021] NSWCCA 274
Cranney v R; Huynh v R
[2017] NSWCCA 234
Cranney v R; Huynh v R
[2017] NSWCCA 234