R v CCJ - [2019] QCA 236

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v CCJ [2019] QCA 236

PARTIES:

R
v
CCJ
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 204 of 2019
DC No 5 of 2016
DC No 13 of 2016

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction

ORIGINATING COURT:

Childrens Court at Townsville – Dates of Conviction: 11 March 2016 (Baulch SC DCJ) and 21 September 2016 (Chief Judge O’Brien)

DELIVERED ON:

Date of Orders: 29 October 2019
Date of Publication of Reasons: 1 November 2019

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

29 October 2019

JUDGES:

Sofronoff P and McMurdo JA and Davis J

ORDERS:

Date of Orders: 29 October 2019

1.   Leave is granted to adduce the medical evidence referred to in the appellant’s application for leave to adduce evidence filed on 28 October 2019.

2.   Appeal allowed.

3.   Convictions on counts 1 to 6 on the indictment and summary charges 1 to 3 be set aside.

4.   Retrial ordered on those counts and charges.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – FITNESS TO PLEAD OR BE TRIED – where the appellant pleaded guilty in the Childrens Court to eight counts and charges including rape, sexual assault, assault occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty and wilful exposure – where the appellant was sentenced to four years detention to be released after serving 70 per cent of the period of detention – where the Attorney-General commenced proceedings under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 for the purposes of which risk assessment reports were prepared – where the risk assessment reports raised concerns about the appellant’s fitness for trial and fitness to plead – where the Crown did not object to the admission of the medical evidence, or to the appeal – whether the appellant was fit to plead

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), s 5, s 8, s 11, s 12, s 13
Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld), s 110, s 118
Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld), s 227

Eastman v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 1; [2000] HCA 29, cited
Kesavarajah v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 230; [1994] HCA 41, cited
Ngatayi v The Queen (1980) 147 CLR 1; [1980] HCA 18, cited
R v Presser [1958] VR 45; [1958] VicRp 9, cited
R v Sitters[2018] QCA 35, cited
R v Spina[2012] QCA 179, cited
R v Sridharan[2017] QCA 160, cited

COUNSEL:

S Robb for the appellant
D Balic for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

SOFRONOFF P: In this appeal, the administration of justice has been greatly assisted by the professionalism with which the representatives of the Director of Public Prosecutions have conducted the matter. I agree with the reasons of Davis J.
McMURDO JA: I agree with the Reasons of Davis J and with the additional remarks by the President.
DAVIS J: The appellant was convicted in 2016 of various offences including three counts of rape. He pleaded…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v CCJ

Details

AGLC: R v CCJ [2019] QCA 236
Case: [2019] QCA 236
Decision Date: 1 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, CCJ, appealed against his convictions on eight counts, including rape, sexual assault, and assault occasioning bodily harm, in the Supreme Court of Victoria. CCJ had pleaded guilty in the Children’s Court to these charges and was sentenced to four years detention, with a non-parole period of 70 per cent. The Attorney-General subsequently initiated proceedings under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003, resulting in risk assessment reports that questioned CCJ’s fitness to plead and be tried. The Crown did not oppose the admission of medical evidence or the appeal.

The primary legal issue was whether CCJ was fit to plead and stand trial. The court needed to determine whether the appellant's mental health condition affected his ability to understand the proceedings, instruct legal counsel, and participate in his defence. The court considered the medical evidence, including reports from psychiatrists and psychologists, which suggested that CCJ’s mental health condition impaired his fitness to plead.

The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant was not fit to plead at the time of his convictions. The court found that CCJ's mental health issues significantly impaired his ability to understand and participate in the trial process. The evidence indicated that he lacked the capacity to comprehend the charges against him, to instruct his legal counsel effectively, and to engage in the proceedings in a meaningful way. Consequently, the court set aside the convictions on counts 1 to 6 and summary charges 1 to 3, and ordered a retrial on these charges.

The court allowed the appeal and ordered that the convictions on counts 1 to 6 and summary charges 1 to 3 be set aside. A retrial was ordered on those counts and charges. The court also granted leave for the medical evidence to be adduced, which played a crucial role in the determination of the appellant's fitness to plead.

Orders

Orders of the court

Date of Orders: 29 October 2019

1. Leave is granted to adduce the medical evidence referred to in the appellant’s application for leave to adduce evidence filed on 28 October 2019.

2. Appeal allowed.

3. Convictions on counts 1 to 6 on the indictment and summary charges 1 to 3 be set aside.

4. Retrial ordered on those counts and charges.

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.

CITATION:	R v CCJ [2019] QCA 236
PARTIES:	R v CCJ (appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 204 of 2019 DC No 5 of 2016 DC No 13 of 2016
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction
ORIGINATING COURT:	Childrens Court at Townsville – Dates of Conviction: 11 March 2016 (Baulch SC DCJ) and 21 September 2016 (Chief Judge O’Brien)
DELIVERED ON:	Date of Orders: 29 October 2019 Date of Publication of Reasons: 1 November 2019
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	29 October 2019
JUDGES:	Sofronoff P and McMurdo JA and Davis J
ORDERS:	Date of Orders: 29 October 2019 1. Leave is granted to adduce the medical evidence referred to in the appellant’s application for leave to adduce evidence filed on 28 October 2019. 2. Appeal allowed. 3. Convictions on counts 1 to 6 on the indictment and summary charges 1 to 3 be set aside. 4. Retrial ordered on those counts and charges.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – FITNESS TO PLEAD OR BE TRIED – where the appellant pleaded guilty in the Childrens Court to eight counts and charges including rape, sexual assault, assault occasioning bodily harm, deprivation of liberty and wilful exposure – where the appellant was sentenced to four years detention to be released after serving 70 per cent of the period of detention – where the Attorney-General commenced proceedings under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 for the purposes of which risk assessment reports were prepared – where the risk assessment reports raised concerns about the appellant’s fitness for trial and fitness to plead – where the Crown did not object to the admission of the medical evidence, or to the appeal – whether the appellant was fit to plead Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld), s 5, s 8, s 11, s 12, s 13 Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld), s 110, s 118 Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld), s 227 Eastman v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 1; [2000] HCA 29, cited Kesavarajah v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 230; [1994] HCA 41, cited Ngatayi v The Queen (1980) 147 CLR 1; [1980] HCA 18, cited R v Presser [1958] VR 45; [1958] VicRp 9, cited R v Sitters[2018] QCA 35, cited R v Spina[2012] QCA 179, cited R v Sridharan[2017] QCA 160, cited
COUNSEL:	S Robb for the appellant D Balic for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent