R v. Kruck

[2007] QCA 177

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v Kruck [2007] QCA 177
PARTIES:	R v KRUCK, Michael Christian (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 7 of 2007 DC No 3357 of 2005
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Extension (Conviction)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	29 May 2007
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	29 May 2007
JUDGES:	Williams JA, White and Atkinson JJ
ORDER:	Application for extension of time adjourned to a date to be fixed
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL-PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – OTHER MATTERS – where applicant initially pleaded not guilty – where pre-trial hearings occurred – where applicant pleaded guilty in February 2006 to relevant charges and was remanded for sentence – where applicant sentenced in December 2006 – where applicant took no steps in period between February and December to have plea set aside – where applicant suffers from a hearing disability – where legal aid previously refused – whether extension should be granted
COUNSEL:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf M J Copley for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

WILLIAMS JA:  This is an application for extension of time to appeal against conviction.  After there had been some pre-trial hearings, and after the applicant had pleaded not guilty to the relevant charges, he was re-arraigned on the 1st of February 2006 and pleaded guilty.  He was then remanded for sentence.  He was sentenced with respect to those two charges on the 7th of December 2006 by Judge Trafford-Walker immediately after he had been found guilty by the jury of another similar offence.

He took no steps in the intervening period - that is, between February and December - to seek to have his plea of guilty set aside.  The applicant has raised some issues as to the advice that he was given by his then-legal representatives which resulted in him changing his plea from not guilty to guilty.  The applicant does suffer from a hearing disability, which has made it difficult for the Court in a courtroom setting to appreciate fully his concerns about the advice given which resulted in the change of plea.

It is also of some concern to the Court that his disability may have had some bearing on communication with his legal representatives in February of 2006 which did result in that change of plea.  In addition to the matter now before the Court, which as I indicated is an application for an extension of time to appeal against conviction, the applicant has appealed his conviction on the 31st of March 2006 before Judge Nase.

That is appeal 144 of 2006, and I understand that Legal Aid has been granted with respect to that appeal.  He has also appealed against his conviction before Judge Trafford-Walker on the 7th of December 2006, and as I understand it, Legal Aid has not yet been assessed with respect to that appeal.  It is the view of the Court that given the disability that the applicant suffers from it is in the interests of justice that he be represented legally with respect to both appeals against conviction and the current application for an extension of time to appeal against conviction.  The Court would request that Legal Aid, having agreed to be involved in appeal 144 of 2006, represent the applicant in respect of all three matters pending before this Court.

As I have indicated, given the applicant's disability, he is at a real disadvantage in endeavouring to appear for himself.  In the circumstances, it would be desirable if the three matters were put down on the one day and that all issues were determined at that time so far as is possible.  For those reasons, the Court will adjourn the current application for an extension of time to a date to be fixed.

WHITE J:  I agree.

ATKINSON J:  I agree.
WILLIAMS JA:  Well, Mr Kruck, Legal Aid will probably be in touch with you.  But if they don't get in touch with you in the near future, you should take steps to speak to them about the matter.  I will have the Registrar send you a copy of the remarks that I made today, so you will have those.

APPLICANT:  I made an application for Legal Aid.  Legal Aid responded and said to me that they do not do extensions of time‑‑‑‑‑

WILLIAMS JA:  Well, I appreciate that, but in the light of what I have said‑‑‑‑‑

APPLICANT:  Yes.

WILLIAMS JA:  ‑‑‑‑‑I am certain that they will reconsider that position.

APPLICANT:  Okay.

WILLIAMS JA:  But as I say, if you do not hear from them within the near future - well, you get in touch with them and draw their attention to the remarks that I made today.  And I will also get the Registrar to send a copy of these remarks today to Legal Aid.  So that gives them something to work on.

APPLICANT:  Thank you.

WILLIAMS JA:  Nothing further from your point of view, Mr Copley?
MR COPLEY:  No, your Honour.

WILLIAMS JA:  All right.  Well, the formal order of the Court is that this matter is adjourned to a date to be fixed.

‑‑‑‑‑