R v Robb Summary | CaseChat AU

[1995] QCA 580

COURT OF APPEAL
MACROSSAN CJ
DAVIES JA

MACKENZIE J

CA No 340 of 1995
THE QUEEN
v.

CODY WARREN ROBB

Applicant

BRISBANE
..DATE 04/10/95
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The circumstances have been outlined in what
I have already said.

The applicant was quite fairly warned that he should attend to apply for any adjournment that he sought and advised of the consequence of not attending. Notwithstanding that, he has not attended. He has had adequate notice of the date for which the appeal has been set.

The Court has considered the substance so far as it emerges from the record book, and it appears that the sentence which was imposed is not, on the face of it, in any way excessive for the behaviour that was involved, rather, the contrary, it could be said. Perhaps the applicant's matter of concern is in respect of the order that the conviction be recorded but that also seems to have been a wholly appropriate order in view of the offence that had been committed and the penalty that was otherwise imposed.

However, we are concerned, really, with the application for adjournment communicated in writing and not yet acceded to and, in my opinion, that application should be refused.

DAVIES JA: I agree.

MACKENZIE J: I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: And then there being no attendance and the substance of the appeal standing, as I have already indicated,

041095 T10/SA M/T COA95/294
in my opinion, the application for leave to appeal should be

refused.

DAVIES JA: I agree.

MACKENZIE J: I agree.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The application is refused.

-----

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Robb, the applicant, Cody Warren Robb, sought leave to appeal against a decision of a lower court. The nature of the dispute was whether the applicant's appeal should be granted, considering his failure to attend court despite being adequately warned. The case was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal. The appeal was dismissed, and the application for leave to appeal was refused.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the applicant's failure to attend court justified the refusal of his application for leave to appeal. The court also had to determine whether the sentence imposed was excessive and whether the order to record the conviction was appropriate. The applicant argued that the sentence was excessive, but the court found that the sentence was not, on the face of it, excessive for the offence committed.

The court reasoned that the applicant was fairly warned to attend court and advised of the consequences of not attending. Despite having adequate notice of the appeal date, the applicant failed to attend, and his application for an adjournment had not been granted. The court considered the substance of the appeal as it emerged from the record book and found that the sentence was not excessive and the order to record the conviction was appropriate. The court concluded that the application for leave to appeal should be refused due to the applicant's failure to attend court. All judges of the Court of Appeal agreed with this decision.

R v Robb

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established