R v HAC

COURT OF APPEAL

JERRARD JA
KEANE JA

HELMAN J

CA No 17 of 2006
DC No 645 of 2005

THE QUEEN

HAC (appellant/applicant)

BRISBANE

..DATE 18/05/2006

ORDER

JERRARD JA: In view of the fact that the appellant wishes to be legally represented and has not yet made an application for legal aid, and in view of the fact that Mr Michael Copley, counsel for the respondent, has raised a relevant matter which may considerably assist HAC in the argument on the appeal and in view of the further fact that HAC managed to send his written outline of argument on the appeal to the Prosecution and not to the Court, it is clear that today is not the appropriate day for hearing his appeal against conviction.

In those circumstances the appeal will be adjourned to a date to be fixed and one purpose of the adjournment is to enable HAC to make a proper application for legal aid. Whether he does so is up to him. The matter will be mentioned probably in about six weeks to determine whether or not HAC has made any such application for legal aid and of the result.

The order of the Court is that the appeal in the matter of HAC v The Queen is adjourned to a date to be fixed.

‑‑‑‑‑

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, HAC, was convicted of a crime in the District Court of Queensland and subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal against his conviction. The appeal was heard by Jerrad JA, Keane JA, and Hellman J. The primary issue before the court was whether the appeal should proceed on the day it was listed, or whether it should be adjourned to allow the appellant to obtain legal representation. The court had to consider the appellant's expressed desire to be legally represented, his failure to apply for legal aid at that point, and the potential benefit of counsel for the respondent raising a matter that could assist the appellant in his appeal.

The court determined that it was not appropriate to proceed with the appeal on the day it was listed. The appellant had indicated his wish to be legally represented and had not applied for legal aid. Additionally, counsel for the respondent had raised an issue that could be beneficial to the appellant's case. The court also noted that the appellant had sent his written outline of argument to the prosecution instead of the court, which further indicated that the appeal was not ready to be heard. The court therefore decided to adjourn the appeal to a later date to enable the appellant to apply for legal aid. The matter was to be mentioned in approximately six weeks to assess whether the appellant had made an application for legal aid and the outcome of such an application.

The court ordered that the appeal be adjourned to a date to be fixed, with the purpose of enabling the appellant to apply for legal aid. The appellant was given the opportunity to make such an application, but the decision to do so was left to him. The court scheduled a mention in about six weeks to determine whether the appellant had applied for legal aid and the result of such an application. This adjournment allowed the appellant to properly prepare his appeal with legal representation, ensuring a fair hearing of his case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established