R v Mitchell - [2008] QCA 394

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Mitchell [2008] QCA 394

PARTIES:

R
v
MITCHELL, Curtis Lloyd
(appellant)

FILE NO:

CA No 174 of 2008
SC No 29 of 2004

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court in Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

9 December 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

28 October 2008

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Holmes JA and McMeekin J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, Holmes JA and McMeekin J concurring as to the order made, McMurdo P dissenting in part.

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – GENERAL MATTERS – where the trial judge gave re-directions in regards to circumstantial evidence – whether the trial judge placed too much emphasis on circumstantial evidence – whether the re-directions incorrectly influenced the jury

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 668E

Cesan v The Queen; Mas Rivadavia v The Queen (2008) 250 ALR 192; [2008] HCA 52, considered
Gassy v The Queen (2008) 245 ALR 613; [2008] HCA 18, followed
The Queen v Holman [1997] 1 Qd R 373; [1996] QCA 262, followed
Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573; [1990] HCA 56, followed

COUNSEL:

J A Hunter for the appellant
R G Martin SC for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

McMURDO P: McMeekin J has set out the relevant issues and most of the pertinent facts so that my reasons for allowing the appeal against the murder conviction can be more briefly stated than otherwise.

The appellant was convicted of murdering the deceased and of assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed with an offensive instrument in respect of both Luke Hudson and Vandra Lorraine Diamond.

There was a persuasive body of evidence, uncontradicted by contrary sworn evidence, that after the appellant and the deceased returned home the appellant assaulted the deceased, Mr Hudson and Ms Diamond. The deceased died some time later without leaving the house.

Pathologist Dr David Williams gave evidence that the cause of death was a head injury due to repeated trauma to the head. Dr Williams agreed that it was possible that the deceased suffered damage to the brain without dying instantly. The deceased's urine alcohol levels suggested that he was very drunk prior to lapsing into unconsciousness; at that time his blood alcohol level would have been above 0.2. He would therefore have been stumbling and slurring his words so that, Dr Williams considered, it would have been very hard to detect, even for a skilled professional, whether the deceased was suffering the effects of the head injury or the intoxication. The deceased also suffered a number of recent (within 24 hours of death) injuries to the knuckles on his right hand, arms, shoulders and knees and a large area of bruising to the left thigh, buttock and forearm, consistent with defending himself from assault…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Mitchell

Details

AGLC: R v Mitchell [2008] QCA 394
Case: [2008] QCA 394
Decision Date: 9 December 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal in R v Mitchell involved the appellant, who was convicted of various serious criminal offences. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia, which was tasked with reviewing the appellant's claims that the trial judge's re-directions on the use of circumstantial evidence were flawed and prejudicial. The appellant argued that the trial judge had given undue emphasis to circumstantial evidence, potentially influencing the jury's decision in a manner that was not legally sound.

The central legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury by over-emphasising the significance of circumstantial evidence and whether this misdirection had the effect of incorrectly influencing the jury's verdict. The court needed to determine if the trial judge's approach to circumstantial evidence was correct and whether it had any impact on the outcome of the trial.

The High Court examined the trial judge's re-directions and concluded that they were consistent with the principles governing the use of circumstantial evidence in criminal trials. The court found that the trial judge had not placed undue emphasis on circumstantial evidence, and there was no evidence to suggest that the jury was incorrectly influenced by the re-directions. The court held that the trial judge's directions were appropriate and did not result in a miscarriage of justice.

As a result of this finding, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld. The court found no grounds to interfere with the trial judge's handling of the evidence, and the appellant's appeal was unsuccessful.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed.

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.

CITATION:	R v Mitchell [2008] QCA 394
PARTIES:	R v MITCHELL, Curtis Lloyd (appellant)
FILE NO:	CA No 174 of 2008 SC No 29 of 2004
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court in Cairns
DELIVERED ON:	9 December 2008
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	28 October 2008
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Holmes JA and McMeekin J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, Holmes JA and McMeekin J concurring as to the order made, McMurdo P dissenting in part.
ORDER:	Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – GENERAL MATTERS – where the trial judge gave re-directions in regards to circumstantial evidence – whether the trial judge placed too much emphasis on circumstantial evidence – whether the re-directions incorrectly influenced the jury Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 668E Cesan v The Queen; Mas Rivadavia v The Queen (2008) 250 ALR 192; [2008] HCA 52, considered Gassy v The Queen (2008) 245 ALR 613; [2008] HCA 18, followed The Queen v Holman [1997] 1 Qd R 373; [1996] QCA 262, followed Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573; [1990] HCA 56, followed
COUNSEL:	J A Hunter for the appellant R G Martin SC for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent