R v Dickinson

[1992] QCA 240

COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 240

MACROSSAN CJ
DAVIES JA

McPHERSON JA

CA No 110 of 1992

THE QUEEN

v.

SHANE MICHAEL DICKINSON

(Appellant)

BRISBANE

.. DATE 14/7/92

JUDGMENT

1

JUDGMENT

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The applicant applies to extend time

within which to appeal.

The conviction occurred on 24 January 1992 and he was

sentenced on that day. The Notice of Appeal is endorsed as

having been received by the Registrar by post on 10 April

1992. Accordingly, the application was well out of time.

The original notice had a very sketchy statement of grounds

which did not look as though they possessed substance. On
considering the matter today, additional material was passed
up to the Court and although it is, in some ways, far from

fully persuasive in respect of the application to extend time,

there is some thing which can be said for it because the

applicant's account on the extension of time issue is now
supported by Mr McInnes, a correctional counsellor; that is,

supported in some respects.

The applicant's account was a rather imprecise one of

difficulty experienced as he was moved after conviction

between various correctional centres so that he lost notes of

material that he had prepared. That was not cogent or
convincing, but it now acqtires some support from the
correctional counsellor's statement. That gentleman says that

the applicant initiated his grounds for appeal while at Boggo

2

Road but, prior to completing the application, he was told he

would be transferred to the Lotus Glen Centre and that he
would have adequate time to submit it. That is the point
which the applicant makes; namely, that his attempts to

prepare it were dislocated by his transfer between the

centres.

The new grounds of appeal which are passed up, on their face,

in one or two instances may have possible substance. No more

can be said in their favour, but it is impossible to judge

their true substance without having access to the record.

In all the circumstances, it seems appropriate to order that

time be extended.

McPHERSON JA: I agree.

DAVIES JA: I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The Court will order, as I say, that time

be extended to cover the grounds passed up, dated 14 July

1992, a copy of which will now go with the record.

MR COSTANZO: Could I just be clear, is the Court ruling that the additional grounds can be added?

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Yes, we are.

3

MR COSTANZO: I was just confirming whether or not the Court is ruling that the additional grounds have been laid.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: Can be raised, yes, we are, because -----

MR COSTANZO: It is normally a separate argument.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: They are the only so-called grounds which

appear to have any prima facie substance. We do not know it
would have been extended otherwise, so we are extending it to

cover those. We will make that order of extension of time.

We further order that the applicant be provided with a copy of

the record when it is prepared.

____

4