R v Q

[2003] QCA 421

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Q [2003] QCA 421

PARTIES:

R  v      Q  (appellant/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 78 of 2003  DC No 300 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction and Sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Maryborough

DELIVERED ON:

26 September 2003

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

22 July 2003

JUDGES:

de Jersey CJ, Davies JA and Helman J  Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

Appeal against conviction dismissed  Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – OTHER MATTERS – QUEENSLAND – whether range of sentence appropriate

CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE – CONFESSIONS AND ADMISSIONS STATEMENTS – VOLUNTARY STATEMENTS – INDUCEMENT – PRESUMPTION OF INDUCEMENT – whether trial judge correctly directed jury as to the onus of proof concerning voluntary confessions

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL –  AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – OTHER CASES – whether verdict of guilty open to jury

Criminal Law Amendment Act 1894 (Qld), s 10

Attorney-General for New South Wales v. Martin (1910) 9 CLR 713, referred to MacPherson v. The Queen (1981) 147 CLR 512, referred to R v Clark, ex parte Attorney-General [1999] QCA 438; CA No 68 of 1999, 11 October 1999, referred to R v Doyle; ex parte Attorney-General [1987] 2 Qd R 732, discussed R v Hagan [1966] Qd R 219, referred to R v Press [1997] QCA 7; CA No 489 of 1996, 14 February 1997, considered
R v Raymond [1994] QCA 441; CA No 299 of 1994, 12 September 1994, considered Wendo v The Queen (1963) 109 CLR 559, referred to

COUNSEL:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf  R G Martin for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf                   Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent

1. de JERSEY CJ:  I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Helman J.  I agree with the orders proposed by His Honour, and with his reasons.

1. DAVIES JA: I agree with the reasons for judgment of Helman J and with the orders he proposes.

1. HELMAN J: This is an appeal against convictions and an application for leave to appeal against sentences.

1. On 11 March 2003 the appellant, then aged forty years, came before the District Court at Maryborough to answer an indictment charging him with two offences allegedly committed in the early hours of 23 September 2002 at Hervey Bay, Queensland:  entering the dwelling of a young woman backpacker in the night with intent to commit an indictable offence (stealing) in the dwelling, and rape of the young woman.  The appellant pleaded not guilty to each count and the trial proceeded until 13 March 2003 when the jury returned verdicts of guilty on each count.  The learned trial judge sentenced the appellant…