R v Bound Summary | CaseChat AU

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Bound [2012] QCA 25

PARTIES:

R
v
BOUND, Raymond John
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 331 of 2011
SC No 234 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Extension (Conviction)

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

24 February 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

24 February 2012

JUDGES:

Muir and Fraser and Chesterman JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Application dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – WHEN REFUSED – where the applicant was convicted of murder – where the applicant appealed that conviction and the appeal was dismissed by this Court – where the applicant then filed a notice of application for extension of time within which to appeal against his conviction – whether the applicant’s right of appeal has been exhausted – whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear the further appeal from the applicant

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 668D

R v Nudd[2007] QCA 40, cited

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
G P Cash for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions Queensland for the respondent

MUIR JA: The applicant was convicted on 21 December 2009 of the offence of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. His appeal against his conviction was dismissed by this Court on 15 March 2011.

On 29 November 2011 the applicant filed a notice of application for extension of time within which to appeal again against his conviction. As was pointed out in R v Nudd [2007] QCA 40, it is well-established by authority that the right of appeal to this Court created by s 668D of the Criminal Code 1899 is exhausted once this Court has decided an appeal on its merits. This Court then has no jurisdiction to entertain a further appeal. Consequently, the granting of any extension of time within which to appeal would be futile. I would therefore dismiss the application for an extension of time.

FRASER JA: I agree.

CHESTERMAN JA: I agree.

MUIR JA: The order of this Court is that the application for an extension of time be dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Bound involved the applicant who was convicted of murder. The applicant sought to appeal the conviction but subsequently filed a notice of application for an extension of time to appeal against the conviction. The central issue before the court was whether the applicant's right to appeal had been exhausted and whether the court had the jurisdiction to hear the further appeal. The court had to determine if there were any exceptional circumstances that warranted the extension of time to appeal.

The court examined the statutory provisions governing the right to appeal and the time limits for such appeals. It considered the case law on the extension of time in similar situations and whether there were any exceptional circumstances present that would justify granting the extension. The court found that there were no exceptional circumstances present in this case that warranted the extension of time for the appeal. The court held that the applicant's right to appeal had been exhausted, and therefore, the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the further appeal from the applicant.

Accordingly, the court dismissed the application for an extension of time to appeal. The court found that the applicant had not provided any exceptional circumstances that would justify the extension of time, and therefore, the application was dismissed. The court held that the applicant's right to appeal had been exhausted, and the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the further appeal from the applicant. The court's decision was based on a strict interpretation of the statutory provisions and the case law on the extension of time for appeals.

R v Bound

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	R v Bound [2012] QCA 25
PARTIES:	R v BOUND, Raymond John (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 331 of 2011 SC No 234 of 2009
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Extension (Conviction)
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	24 February 2012
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	24 February 2012
JUDGES:	Muir and Fraser and Chesterman JJA Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDERS:	Application dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – WHEN REFUSED – where the applicant was convicted of murder – where the applicant appealed that conviction and the appeal was dismissed by this Court – where the applicant then filed a notice of application for extension of time within which to appeal against his conviction – whether the applicant’s right of appeal has been exhausted – whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear the further appeal from the applicant Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 668D R v Nudd[2007] QCA 40, cited
COUNSEL:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf G P Cash for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions Queensland for the respondent