SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
R v GAH [2009] QCA 70
PARTIES:
R
v
GAH
(applicant)FILE NO/S:
CA No 322 of 2008
DC No 457 of 2007
DC No 458 of 2007DIVISION:
Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:
Application for Extension (Sentence)
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court at Beenleigh
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:
24 March 2009DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
24 March 2009
JUDGES:
Chesterman JA, Mullins and Douglas JJ
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order madeORDER:
Application for extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against sentence refused
CATCHWORDS:
APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – when refused – where the applicant was convicted of sexual offences against his daughter and stepdaughter – where the application for leave to appeal against sentence was lodged 10 months out of time – where the applicant sought the extension of time on ground that the sentences were manifestly excessive – whether there was satisfactory explanation for the delay – where applicant did not file application for extension of time after obtaining legal advice – where counsel for the applicant at his sentencing expressly agreed with the range of head sentence put forward by the prosecution for the most serious of the charges on each indictment – whether it would be in the interests of justice to grant the extension
R v SAG[2004] QCA 286, considered
R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667; [1998] QCA 304, followedCOUNSEL:
The applicant appeared on his own behalf
D R Kinsella for the respondentSOLICITORS:
The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent
MULLINS J: The applicant seeks an extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against the sentences imposed on him on 19 December 2007 when he pleaded guilty to sexual offences on one indictment involving his daughter and on a second indictment involving his stepdaughter.
There were 23 counts on the first indictment. The offending took place between June 2002 and October 2006. The applicant was sentenced to 11 years' imprisonment for one count of maintaining a sexual relationship, nine years for each of 10 counts of rape and six years for each of 12 counts of indecent treatment of a child or attempted indecent treatment of a child.
There were 14 counts on the second indictment. The period of offending involving the stepdaughter was about one year from October 2005. On the second indictment the applicant was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment for one count of maintaining a sexual relationship, six years for each of four counts of rape and five years for each of nine counts of indecent treatment of a child or attempted indecent treatment of a child.
Each of the sentences for the offences of maintaining and rape were declared to be serious violent offences. All…
Continue reading R v GAH
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v GAH [2009] QCA 70
- Case
- [2009] QCA 70
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court held that it was necessary to consider whether there was a satisfactory explanation for the delay in lodging the application for leave to appeal against sentence. The court found that the applicant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for the delay. The court also noted that the applicant's counsel at his sentencing expressly agreed with the range of head sentence put forward by the prosecution for the most serious of the charges on each indictment. The court concluded that it would not be in the interests of justice to grant the extension of time. The court held that the application for extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against sentence was refused.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against sentence refused
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.