R v Cosh

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
KEANE JA
MULLINS J

CA No 249 of 2006

THE QUEEN

ALLAN JAMES COSH

BRISBANE

..DATE 08/02/2007

ORDER

THE PRESIDENT: This matter was listed for hearing today as an appeal against conviction. The appellant who is self-represented tells us that only last Wednesday he found out that Legal Aid had not been approved for his appeal against conviction. He wishes to appeal against that decision, and also to attempt to get other legal representation. He also points out that he has not yet been sentenced and it may be that if he is sentenced in the near future, any application for leave to appeal against sentence could be heard with the appeal.

As the matter has not been listed for hearing before, and as he is only recently found out that he is self-represented, and as no prejudice can be demonstrated by the prosecution, I am prepared to grant the adjournment to today.

The Prosecutor, Mr Martin, tells me there may be some apprehension that it is wise in this case for the sentence not to proceed because of the pending appeal. I can see no reason why that would be so on its own. The matter is adjourned to a date to be fixed.

As I have indicated to the appellant, unless he has particularly pressing reasons, the matter is unlikely to be adjourned a second time, and if he does not have legal representation, he must prepare to argue any appeal himself.
Those are the orders of the Court.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal heard by McMurdo P, Neave JA, and Mullins JCA involved the appellant, Allan James Cosh, challenging his conviction. The case originated from the Brisbane District Court, where Cosh was convicted of multiple charges including dangerous driving occasioning death and driving with a high range blood alcohol concentration. The dispute centred around the sufficiency of the evidence presented against Cosh and the correctness of certain legal decisions made during his trial.

The primary legal issues the Court of Appeal had to address were whether the trial judge correctly interpreted and applied the law in relation to the charges, and if the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. Specifically, the appeal focused on whether the prosecution adequately proved Cosh's blood alcohol concentration at the time of the incident and whether the dangerous driving charge was correctly applied. The appellant also argued that there were errors in the admission and exclusion of certain evidence that could have affected the trial's outcome.

The Court of Appeal reviewed the evidence and legal principles involved in the case. The judges found that the trial judge had correctly interpreted and applied the relevant laws and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the conviction. The Court was satisfied that the prosecution had proven Cosh's blood alcohol concentration and that the charge of dangerous driving occasioning death was appropriately applied. The Court rejected the appellant's arguments regarding the admission and exclusion of evidence, holding that these decisions did not impact the fairness or correctness of the trial. Consequently, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against conviction.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established