R v Cummins

[2001] QCA 29

[2001] QCA 29

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P DAVIES JA THOMAS JA

CA No 287 of 2000
THE QUEEN
v.

PAUL GERARD CUMMINS

BRISBANE
..DATE 09/02/2001
09022001 T3/PAF23 M/T COA18/2001

THE PRESIDENT: The applicant was convicted after a trial in the Townsville Supreme Court for attempted murder and serious assault and was sentenced to fourteen years' imprisonment on 3 August 2000. No appeal against conviction or application for leave to appeal against sentence was filed within time.

The applicant now seeks an extension of time for filing a
notice of appeal against conviction and notice of application
for leave to appeal against the sentence. This application was

filed on 26 October 2000, almost two months late.

The applicant is unrepresented on this application which is
made by telephone from Townsville where he is currently serving
his sentence. His application appears to have been completed
by his trial lawyer, Mr Ian Pilgrim, from the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Community Legal Service. It is not
supported by any sworn material but claims that the person
handling the applicant's file wrongly believed a notice of
appeal had been sent to the Court of Appeal within time. File
notes handed to the Appeal Judges indicate that a member of the
Registry staff contacted Mr Pilgrim who confirmed that the
reason for failing to lodge the appeal within time was because

of an error within his office.

One of the grounds of the appeal sought to be argued is that
the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory. This necessitates a
consideration of all the evidence, something which cannot be
done fully on the material before this Court today. The
material before this Court today does not necessarily indicate
09022001 T3/PAF23 M/T COA18/2001

the appeal is promising and, if the appeal is to be progressed, particulars of the grounds of appeal that the verdict is unsafe and unsatisfactory should be provided.

The two particulars so far provided as grounds of appeal do not
necessarily appear promising. Nevertheless, in the
circumstances I would extend time for filing of the notice of
appeal against conviction and application for leave to appeal
against sentence. I would grant the application. An
explanation has been given for the reason for the delay; this
is not the fault of the applicant personally. The proposed
grounds of appeal have not been shown to be entirely without
prospect, and the delay is of a reasonably short duration.

I would extend time for the filing of the notice of appeal against conviction and the application for leave to appeal against sentence in this matter until 27 October 2001.

DAVIES JA: I agree

THOMAS JA: Yes, I agree also.

THE PRESIDENT: The order is as I have outlined.

-----