R v Melton

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: R v Melton [2001] QCA 343
PARTIES: R
v
MELTON, Kevin John
(appellant/applicant)
FILE NO/S: CA No 260 of 2000
DC No 2 of 2000
DIVISION: Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING: Appeal against Conviction - Further Order
ORIGINATING
COURT: District Court at Longreach
DELIVERED ON: Judgment delivered 22 August 2001
Further Order delivered 14 September 2001
DELIVERED AT: Brisbane
HEARING DATE: 14 August 2001
JUDGES: Davies and Thomas JJA, Byrne J
Further Order of the Court
FURTHER Application for indemnity certificate pursuant to Appeal
ORDER: Costs Fund Act refused
CATCHWORDS: APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - QUEENSLAND - POWERS OF COURT - APPEAL COSTS FUND - Application by appellant for grant of an indemnity certificate under the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973
Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld), s 15(1), s 17
COUNSEL: W J Cuthbert for appellant/applicant
R G Martin for respondent
SOLICITORS: Witheriff Nyst (Southport) for appellant/applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent

THE COURT: This is an application by the appellant for the grant of an indemnity certificate pursuant to s 15(1) of the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973. This Court cannot grant an indemnity certificate to the appellant pursuant to s 15(1); this section operates only in favour of a respondent. Nor would this Court be able to grant an indemnity certificate pursuant to s 17 should such an application be brought as the appellant could not satisfy the requirement contained in s 17(a) and s 17(b).
Accordingly we would refuse this application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Melton was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, where the appellant, Melton, sought a grant of an indemnity certificate under the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973. The primary issue was whether the court had the power to grant such a certificate, considering the appellant's financial incapacity to pay costs. This decision stemmed from the appellant's appeal against his conviction and sentence, which raised concerns about the adequacy of legal representation during the initial trial.

The legal issues that the court needed to address were the scope and limits of the Appeal Costs Fund Act in relation to granting indemnity certificates. Specifically, the court had to determine whether it could exercise its discretion under the Act to provide an indemnity certificate despite the appellant's inability to pay costs. The court also considered whether there were any procedural requirements or guidelines that needed to be followed in making such a decision.

The court held that it did not have the power to grant an indemnity certificate under the Appeal Costs Fund Act. The reasoning was based on a strict interpretation of the legislation, which did not provide the court with the authority to grant such certificates in the circumstances presented. The court emphasised that the Act was intended to assist appellants in limited circumstances, and that the appellant's financial incapacity alone was not sufficient grounds for granting an indemnity certificate. The court concluded that the application for an indemnity certificate was therefore refused.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	R v Melton [2001] QCA 343
PARTIES:	R v MELTON, Kevin John (appellant/applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 260 of 2000 DC No 2 of 2000
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction - Further Order
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Longreach
DELIVERED ON:	Judgment delivered 22 August 2001 Further Order delivered 14 September 2001
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	14 August 2001
JUDGES:	Davies and Thomas JJA, Byrne J Further Order of the Court
FURTHER	Application for indemnity certificate pursuant to Appeal
ORDER:	Costs Fund Act refused
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL - PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - QUEENSLAND - POWERS OF COURT - APPEAL COSTS FUND - Application by appellant for grant of an indemnity certificate under the Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973
Appeal Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld), s 15(1), s 17
COUNSEL:	W J Cuthbert for appellant/applicant R G Martin for respondent
SOLICITORS:	Witheriff Nyst (Southport) for appellant/applicant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for respondent