R v Bellino

[2003] QCA 110

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v Bellino [2003] QCA 110
PARTIES:	R v BELLINO, Stephen William (applicant/appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 391 of 2002 SC No 217 of 2002
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction & Sentence
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX	14 March 2003
TEMPORE ON:
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	14 March 2003
JUDGES:	McPherson JA, Jerrard JA and White J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	Allow the appeal against conviction
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL ALLOWED – where parcel addressed to appellant’s house- mate delivered to appellant’s home - where appellant convicted of unlawfully having possession of cannabis sativa – whether jury could safely draw an inference of the appellant’s knowledge that the parcel contained the illegal substance
Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld), s 668E M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487, considered
COUNSEL:	B Farr for the appellant T Rafter for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	NR Barbi Solicitors for the appellant Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent

WHITE J: The appellant was found guilty on the 29th October 2002 after trial of one count of unlawfully having possession of cannabis sativa with a circumstance of aggravation. He was sentenced to four months' imprisonment wholly suspended with an operational period of eight months.

He appeals against conviction on the grounds that the learned

trial Judge ought to have found that there was no case to go	10
to the jury. In the alternative, that the verdict although
said to be unsafe and unsatisfactory in the grounds of appeal
is unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the
evidence pursuant to section 668E of the Criminal Code.
The appellant is also an applicant for leave to appeal against	20
sentence.
On the 2nd May 2001 customs authorities at Brisbane Airport
intercepted a package in transit from Launceston in Tasmania
to Queensland. Police were called and a search of the package	30
revealed that it contained over nine kilograms of cannabis
sativa. The police removed three-quarters of the cannabis and
replaced it with telephone books before rewrapping and
readdressing it and delivering it using an undercover officer
to the address which was on the package.	40
It was addressed to one Natasha Horvath at an address in
Fortitude Valley. The appellant shared accommodation at that
address with the addressee. The undercover police officer who
delivered the parcel was deceased by the time of the trial.	50
His statement and evidence at committal were read to the jury.
That officer spoke via the intercom system at the block of
units to the appellant. He was then met at the door by the
appellant.

2  60

A female person, the addressee was seated on a couch in front

of the television in the lounge room…