R v Mitchell

[2007] QCA 267

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Mitchell [2007] QCA 267

PARTIES:

R
v
MITCHELL, Curtis Lloyd
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 97 of 2007
SC No 29 of 2007

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

17 August 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

27 July 2007

JUDGES:

Williams and Keane JJA and Mullins J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

1. Allow the appeal
2. Quash the convictions on all counts
3. Order a re-trial on all counts

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – GENERAL MATTERS – OTHERS MATTERS – where appellant convicted of one count of murder and two counts of assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed with an offensive instrument – where evidence suggested that the appellant had lied – where learned trial judge gave an Edwards direction – whether direction prejudiced the appellant's right to a fair trial – circumstances in which an Edwards direction will be necessary

Edwards v The Queen (1993) 178 CLR 193, considered
R v Brennan [1999] 2 Qd R 529, considered
R v Box & Martin[2001] QCA 272; CA Nos 304 & 307 of 2000, 20 July 2001, considered
R v Chevathen& Dorrick (2001) 122 A Crim R 441, [2001] QCA 337, cited
R v Taylor, unreported, Court of Appeal of England and Wales, No 9703549/W2; 12 May 1998, considered
R v Wehlow (2001) 122 A Crim R 63; [2001] QCA 193, considered
Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234, considered

COUNSEL:

J R 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

1. WILLIAMS JA: The appellant was convicted after a trial of one count of murder and two counts of assault occasioning bodily harm whilst armed with an offensive instrument.  He appeals against those convictions, principally relying on the submission that the summing up by the learned trial judge on the topic of lies prejudiced his fair trial.

1. As at 10 April 2004, Easter Saturday, the appellant lived in a house in Atherton with his de facto wife Vandra Diamond, his daughter Amelia, a man named Hudson and the deceased, David Rolley.  On the following morning Rolley was found dead, slumped against a wall inside the house.  He had suffered significant head injuries.  An analysis of the deceased's blood and urine established he was significantly affected by alcohol at the time of his death.

1. There was evidence from Hudson and Diamond that each of them and Rolley had been drinking in the house on the afternoon and evening of 10 April.  At some stage the three moved into the deceased's bedroom to watch tv.  There was some evidence that the door to that…