R v Jolly

[2002] QCA 306

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Jolly [2002] QCA 306

PARTIES:

R

V

JOLLY, Gregory Rollo
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 53 of 2002

DC No 754 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against conviction and sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Ipswich

DELIVERED ON:

23 August 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

13 August 2002

JUDGES:

Williams JA, Mackenzie and Holmes JJ

Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

Appeal against conviction dismissed.  Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PARTICULAR OFFENCES - DRIVING OFFENCES – CULPABLE OR DANGEROUS DRIVING CAUSING DEATH OR BODILY HARM – PROOF AND EVIDENCE -  where appellant convicted of dangerous driving causing death and grievous bodily harm – whether there was reliable evidence that the appellant’s car had been forced onto the wrong side of the road – whether the element of “fault” had been established

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – GENERALLY – where appeal against conviction - whether verdict unsafe and unsatisfactory– whether a jury acting reasonably on the whole of the evidence was bound to have a reasonable doubt

Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439, considered

COUNSEL:

R Clutterbuck for the appellant
C Heaton for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Mitchells Solicitors for the appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. WILLIAMS JA:  I agree with the reasons for judgment of Mackenzie J and with the order he proposes.

1. MACKENZIE J:  The appellant was convicted of dangerous driving causing death and grievous bodily harm.  The incident occurred on the Brisbane Valley Highway when the vehicle driven by the appellant collided with cars travelling in the opposite direction.

1. It occurred in the vicinity of where two lanes merged at the end of an overtaking lane.  In his record of interview and in evidence at the trial the appellant said that he was attempting to overtake a vehicle driven by an elderly man, which was slow moving and towing a caravan.  He said that the vehicle in front started to move to the right, forcing him to move to the right and into the path of oncoming traffic.  He applied his brakes which caused his wheels to lock up and his trailer to jack-knife with the result that his car spun into the path of the oncoming traffic.  He attempted to drive across the oncoming traffic to avoid a collision but was unsuccessful.

1. The Crown case depended on the evidence of other road users.  The day was generally rainy and the road was wet.  The traffic was generally travelling more slowly than the speed limit because of the conditions.  One of the Crown witnesses Ms Blake had been following the appellant’s vehicle, which was towing a trailer with two motorcycles on it, but passed it in the overtaking section.  She also passed the vehicle towing the caravan.  She…