COURT OF APPEAL
WILLIAMS JA
JERRARD JA
CHESTERMAN J
CA No 406 of 2003
THE QUEEN
v.
PETER JAMES KITZELMANN Applicant
BRISBANE
..DATE 21/05/2004
JUDGMENT
APPLICANT conducted his own case
MR M J COPLEY (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland)) for the respondent
WILLIAMS JA: On the applicant informing the Court he does not wish to proceed, the application will be dismissed.
-----
Details
- AGLC
- R v Kitzelmann [2004] QCA 179
- Case
- [2004] QCA 179
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court of Appeal heard an application by Peter James Kitzelmann against The Queen. The applicant, who conducted his own case, sought to appeal a decision of the lower court. The matter was brought before the Court of Appeal by Mr M J Copley, instructed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland).
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the application by the applicant should proceed, given that he informed the Court he did not wish to do so. This raised questions regarding the applicant's right to conduct his own case and the procedural implications of such a decision.
The Court of Appeal, consisting of Williams JA, Jerrard JA, and Chesterman J, dismissed the application. The decision was made based on the applicant's explicit statement that he did not wish to proceed with the case. The Court of Appeal concluded that, in light of this declaration, there was no basis for the application to continue.
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the application by the applicant should proceed, given that he informed the Court he did not wish to do so. This raised questions regarding the applicant's right to conduct his own case and the procedural implications of such a decision.
The Court of Appeal, consisting of Williams JA, Jerrard JA, and Chesterman J, dismissed the application. The decision was made based on the applicant's explicit statement that he did not wish to proceed with the case. The Court of Appeal concluded that, in light of this declaration, there was no basis for the application to continue.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.