R v Aston-Brien

Case [2000] QCA 211


SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: R v Aston-Brien [2000] QCA 211
PARTIES: R
v
ASTON-BRIEN, Stephen John
(appellant)
FILE NO/S: CA No 439 of 1999
DC No 177 of 1999
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Appeal against conviction and sentence
ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Ipswich

DELIVERED ON: 2 June 2000
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 11 May 2000
JUDGES: Davies JA, Mackenzie and Douglas JJ
Judgment of the Court
ORDER: Appeal against conviction allowed and new trial ordered
CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE – COMPLAINTS – GENERALLY – appeal against conviction and sentence on charge of rape – complainant at time of offence was recovering from injuries suffered as a result of a motor vehicle accident – complainant was a user of amphetamines – after the incident the complainant was given drugs by appellant – the following day the complainant told the appellant's girlfriend of the incident – approximately six months later a further complaint was made which led to the arrest of the appellant – where first complaint was not treated as recent for the purposes of the trial – where trial judge did not give directions as to the permissible use of initial complaint – whether a direction should have been given to warn the jury that evidence of prior complaint was not evidence of facts in issue

CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE – EVIDENTIARY MATTERS RELATING TO WITNESSES AND ACCUSED PERSONS – IMPEACHMENT OF CREDIT AND ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE AS TO CREDIT – GENERALLY – whether there should have been a direction as to evidence tending to show the appellant was of bad character – where it is an impermissible conclusion that appellant's involvement with drugs constitutes guilt of rape – whether lack of direction vitiated the trial

Jones v The Queen (1997) 71 ALJR 538, applied
Robinson (1998) 102 A Crim R 89, considered
Robinson v The Queen (1999) 73 ALJR 1314, considered
Suresh v The Queen (1998) 153 ALR 145, applied

COUNSEL: J M McLennan for appellant
A J Rafter for respondent
SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Queensland for appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent
  1. THE COURT:  The appellant was convicted of rape and sentenced to six years imprisonment.  He appeals against his conviction and seeks leave to appeal against sentence.

  1. The complainant was a 20 year old woman who from time to time lived with the appellant and his girlfriend.  The complainant was a user of amphetamines at the time of the offence.  On the day of the offence she was recovering from injuries suffered two days before when she got out of a moving vehicle as a result of an argument with the driver.  She was self-medicating herself with Serapax and codeine phosphate for the two days while she was convalescing.

  1. Her evidence was that she was asleep in the bed normally shared by the appellant and his girlfriend.  She had gone to bed wearing only boxer shorts and a T-shirt.  She was awakened to find the appellant on top…

Continue reading R v Aston-Brien

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Aston-Brien [2000] QCA 211
Case
[2000] QCA 211
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal before the court was brought by the appellant, Aston-Brien, against his conviction and sentence on a charge of rape. The complainant in the case was a person who, at the time of the offence, was recovering from injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Additionally, the complainant was a user of amphetamines. Following the incident in question, the appellant provided the complainant with drugs. The following day, the complainant disclosed the incident to the appellant's girlfriend. Approximately six months later, a further complaint was made, which resulted in the arrest of the appellant. During the trial, the first complaint was not treated as recent for the purposes of the proceedings. The trial judge also did not give any directions regarding the permissible use of the initial complaint. The central legal issues that the court had to decide were whether a direction should have been given to warn the jury that evidence of the prior complaint was not evidence of facts in issue and whether there should have been a direction regarding evidence tending to show the appellant was of bad character.

The court found that the trial judge's failure to provide a direction regarding the use of the initial complaint was an error. It was held that the jury should have been warned that evidence of the prior complaint was not evidence of facts in issue, as it was not treated as recent. Additionally, the court considered the issue of whether there should have been a direction regarding evidence tending to show the appellant was of bad character. The court held that it was an impermissible conclusion that the appellant's involvement with drugs constituted guilt of the offence of rape. The lack of direction regarding the use of the prior complaint and the impermissible conclusion regarding the appellant's character were considered to have vitiated the trial. Consequently, the appeal against the conviction was allowed, and a new trial was ordered.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal against conviction allowed and new trial ordered

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.