R v Kelly

[2006] QCA 107

COURT OF APPEAL

McMURDO P
KEANE JA
CHESTERMAN J

CA No 175 of 2005

THE QUEEN

v.

ROBIN WILLIAM KELLY  Appellant           

BRISBANE

..DATE 12/04/2006

JUDGMENT

MR P MURPHY (of Patrick Murphy) for the appellant

MR C W HEATON (instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland)) for the respondent

THE PRESIDENT:  This appeal was lodged in October last year.  It has a long history of adjournments which are set out in the order granting the adjournment on 1 February 2006.  I will not repeat that history here.  The applicant on that occasion was told that he could not expect any further successful adjournment of that appeal unless there were some quite exceptional reasons.  Mr Murphy appears for him today asking for a further adjournment.

It seems that he has now been able through a third party to place Mr Murphy in funds and Mr Murphy intends to brief an experienced appellate counsel to conduct his appeal if the adjournment is granted.  Mr Murphy is not in a position to conduct the appeal today because of matters raised by the appellant in respect of the conduct of counsel and other matters.  The appellant has served in full the term of imprisonment imposed on him.  He is presently paying off his fine through SPER despite his recent bankruptcy.

In circumstances where he has successfully been able to raise funds to brief counsel, and Mr Heaton for the respondent does not oppose the adjournment, it seems to me that the interests of justice would best be served by granting one further adjournment of this appeal.  I would, however, point out that the chances of any further adjournment being granted are even slighter on this occasion than on 1 February 2006 when the Court last dealt with the matter.  I would be inclined to grant the adjournment and order that the appellant follow all directions given by the Deputy Registrar (Appeals) in preparing the matter for hearing.

KEANE JA:  I agree.

CHESTERMAN J:  I agree.

THE PRESIDENT:  That is the order of the Court.

-----