CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – TRIAL HAD BEFORE JUDGE WITHOUT A JURY – ELECTION – where the applicant is charged on indictment with one count of rape – where the applicant makes an application for a trial by judge alone – whether a no jury order is in the interests of justice
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent
Application
The defendant is charged with one count of rape, allegedly committed upon a cellmate on or about 16 October 2023 at the Brisbane Correctional Centre.
The matter is listed for trial in the District Court of Brisbane during the week commencing 8 September 2025. The identity of the trial judge is not known to the defendant.
The defendant has made a pre-trial application pursuant to section 590AA(2)(da) of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) (Criminal Code) for an order that the trial proceed by a judge sitting without a jury under section 615 of the Criminal Code.
The Crown opposes the application.
Relevant legislation and authorities
Sections 614 and 615 form part of Chapter 62 Division 9A of Part 8 of the Criminal Code which concerns trials conducted by judges alone, without a jury.
Section 614 permits the making of an application for an order that the accused person be tried by a judge sitting alone without a jury. Although it is common ground that there is no “starting assumption” that there…
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 Dennis
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Dennis [2025] QDC 107
Case
[2025] QDC 107
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of R v Dennis, the applicant faced a charge of rape, with the proceedings being conducted before a judge without a jury. The applicant applied for the trial to proceed by way of a judge alone, arguing that such an arrangement would be in the interests of justice. The court was tasked with determining whether to grant the application and proceed with a trial by judge alone.
The legal issues before the court involved assessing whether a no jury order would be appropriate in this case. This assessment required a consideration of the principles guiding the exercise of discretion in such matters. The court needed to weigh the potential benefits of a trial by judge alone against the established right to a jury trial, particularly in cases involving serious indictable offences like rape.
The court concluded that the application for a trial by judge alone should be granted. It found that the interests of justice would be served by proceeding with a judge alone, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case. The decision was grounded in the recognition that a jury trial might present additional challenges for the applicant in this instance. Consequently, the trial proceeded with a judge alone, reflecting a careful balance of the rights and needs involved in the case.