R v Goodenough

[2010] QCA 238

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Goodenough [2010] QCA 238

PARTIES:

R
v
GOODENOUGH, David Kenneth
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 174 of 2010
DC No 2053 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Extension (Sentence)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

3 September 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

3 September 2010

JUDGES:

Holmes, Chesterman and White JJA
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Application for extension of time refused

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PROCEDURE – NOTICES OF APPEAL – TIME FOR APPEAL AND EXTENSION THEREOF – where applicant pleaded guilty to one count of fraud – where applicant dishonestly obtained $610,644.98 – where applicant sentenced to seven years imprisonment with parole eligibility after 28 months – where applicant sought extension of time within which to lodge an application for leave to appeal his sentence – where applicant out of time by seven months – where applicant did not have a compelling or detailed explanation for the delay – where head sentence not outside proper exercise of discretion – where parole eligibility date properly took into account mitigating factors – whether application for extension of time should be granted

R v Gourley[2003] QCA 307, considered
R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667; [1998] QCA 304, applied
R v Tindale[2008] QCA 24, considered
R v Twidale[2009] QCA 200, considered

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
M B Lehane for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

HOLMES JA:  On 11 November 2009, the applicant was convicted, on a plea of guilty, of one count of fraud.  It was alleged that over a period of 20 months he had dishonestly obtained $610,664.98 from a finance company.  He was sentenced to seven years imprisonment with a recommendation for parole after 28 months.  On 20 July 2010 (a little over seven months out of time), he filed an application for an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal against that sentence.  In determining such an application, the Court will consider the length of the delay, the explanation for it, and whether it is in the interests of justice to grant the extension, the last of which “may involve some assessment of whether the appeal seems to be a viable one”: R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667.

As to the explanation for the delay, the applicant says that after he was sentenced he was shocked and depressed and did not turn his mind to the possibility of an appeal until some months had passed.  In February 2010, he contacted a family friend who was a barrister, with whom letters were exchanged.  By a letter of 24 May, the applicant says, he was advised to contact Legal Aid for assistance.  He spent some time,…