Legal Research
Cases
R v Shipley

R v Shipley

Case [2014] QSC 299 10 December 2014

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:
R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299

PARTIES:
THE QUEEN
(applicant)

And

SHIPLEY, Kathleen May
(respondent)

FILE NO/S: SUP37/14

DIVISION: Trial Division

PROCEEDING: Application

ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON: 10 December 2014

DELIVERED AT: Rockhampton

HEARING DATE: 3 December 2014

JUDGE: McMeekin J

ORDERS:

1. Order that pleas of guilty be entered to the charges on indictment SUP37/14 notwithstanding the respondent’s pleas of not guilty.

CATCHWORDS
CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – PLEAS – OTHER MATTERS – where the respondent pleaded guilty to possession of drug offences by way of registry committal – where the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle where drugs were found – where the respondent denied knowledge of the drugs – where the respondent subsequently pleaded not guilty to the charges on arraignment in the Supreme Court – where the Crown seeks a direction that a guilty plea should be entered – whether the respondent can withdraw a plea of guilty entered by way of a registry committal

Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) s 600
Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) s 9, s 116, s 129
Justices Act 1886 (Qld) s 114

Attorney-General (Qld) v Lawrence [2013] QCA 364 cited
Clare v R (1994) 2 Qd R 619; [1993] QCA 558 cited
Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24 cited
Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1; [1989] HCA 45 cited
Meissner v R (1996) 184 CLR 501; [1995] HCA 41 cited
R v Amanatidis [2001] NSWCCA 400 cited
R v Bridges [1986] 2 Qd R 391 cited
R v GV [2006] QCA 394 cited
R v McGregor [2009] QCA 308 cited
R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493 cited
R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199 cited
R v Phillips and Lawrence [1967] Qd R 237 cited
R v Smythe [1997] 2 Qd R 223 cited
R v Solway [1984] 2 Qd R 75 cited
R v Von Snarski. [2001] QCA 71 cited
R v Warneminde [1978] Qd R 371 cited
Thow v Campbell [1997] 2 Qd R 324 cited

COUNSEL:
A Baker for the applicant
D Winning (Sol) for the respondent

SOLICITORS:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the applicant
Winning Lawyers for the respondent

McMeekin J:

Ms Shipley is charged with two counts of possession of a dangerous drug, one with a circumstance of aggravation. She pleaded guilty to these charges by way of a registry committal. When arraigned in the Supreme Court on 24 November 2014 Ms Shipley entered pleas of not guilty.

There are two issues. The first is whether Ms Shipley can withdraw a plea of guilty entered by way of a registry committal. The second is whether, if that is allowed, the fact of the plea of guilty can be proved at her trial. The result of both issues is governed by s 600 of the Criminal Code 1899 (Qld).

The Crown Case

The applications…

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 Shipley

Details

AGLC: R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299
Case: [2014] QSC 299
Decision Date: 10 December 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Shipley involved the respondent who had initially pleaded guilty to possession of drug offences through registry committal. As a passenger in a vehicle where drugs were discovered, the respondent denied any knowledge of the drugs' presence. However, upon arraignment in the Supreme Court, the respondent changed their plea to not guilty. The Crown subsequently sought a direction to enforce the earlier guilty plea. The court was tasked with determining whether the respondent could retract a guilty plea entered via registry committal.

The legal issues at hand centred on the conditions and procedures under which a defendant can withdraw a guilty plea entered through registry committal. The court had to consider the principles of justice and fairness, the procedural safeguards in place, and whether the respondent's change of plea could be permitted under the circumstances. The Crown argued that the respondent should be bound by the initial plea, while the defence contended that the change of plea should be allowed to ensure a fair trial.

The court deliberated on the respondent's right to a fair trial and the importance of ensuring that pleas are entered voluntarily and with full understanding of the consequences. It was noted that while the law generally favours the finality of pleas, exceptions could be made if justice so requires. In this instance, the court found that the respondent's plea of not guilty, entered at arraignment, did not undermine the integrity of the judicial process, and therefore, the respondent was allowed to proceed with their plea of not guilty. The court concluded that the principles of justice necessitated permitting the respondent to withdraw the earlier plea and that the respondent's plea of not guilty should be accepted.

The court ordered that pleas of guilty be entered to the charges on indictment SUP37/14 despite the respondent’s pleas of not guilty. This decision underscores the importance of the principles of fairness and justice in the criminal procedure, ensuring that defendants have the opportunity to fully participate in their defence.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Order that pleas of guilty be entered to the charges on indictment SUP37/14 notwithstanding the respondent’s pleas of not guilty.

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.

Actions

Citations

R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299

Most Recent Citation

R v Shipley [2016] QCA 23

Cases Citing This Decision

Chiro v The Queen [2017] HCA 37
Citation 1 (Para 9)

…he Criminal Law; Comprising the Practice, Pleadings, and Evidence which Occur in the Course of Criminal Prosecutions , (1816), vol 1 at 642. See also R v Shipley (1784) 4 Dougl 73 at 119-121 [99 ER 774 at 798-799]; Hale, The History of the Pleas of the Crown , (1800), vol 2 at 301‑302; Foster, A Report of Some Procee…
Thammaruknon v Queensland Police Service [2016] QDC 31
Citation 2

…illo v Wilcox [1964] WAR 44 Slater v Marshall [1965] WAR 222 Meissner v The Queen (1994-95) 184 CLR 132 R v GV [2006] QCA 394 R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299 Gallo v Dawson (1990) 93 ALR 479 Neil v Nott (1994) 121 ALR 148 R v Hura (2001) 121 A Crim R 472 R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493 R v The Justices at Cloncurry; Ex pa…
R v Shipley [2016] QCA 23
Citation 3

…CA No 32 of 2015 SC No 37 of 2014 DIVISION: Court of Appeal PROCEEDING: Appeal against Conviction ORIGINATING COURT: Supreme Court at Rockhampton – [2014] QSC 299 DELIVERED ON: 12 February 2016 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane HEARING DATE: 6 October 2015 JUDGES: Gotterson JA and Peter Lyons and Dalton JJ Separate reasons…
R v Vinck [2015] QDC 35
Citation 4 (Para 1)

…The most recent, and indeed only, decision on point is R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299. In that case, McMeekan J considered the construction and application of s 600(4) in these circumstances to decipher the appropriate test laid down in the statute. At paragraph [62], his honour distinguished the test from that of s…
Stanton v R [2001] WASCA 189
Citation 5

…54 This has been part of the law for a very long time. In R v Shipley (1784) 4 Doug 171 Lord Mansfield said, at 176:…

See all citing cases →

Cases Cited

Attorney-General (Qld) v Lawrence [2013] QCA 364
Citation 1

…de 1899 (Qld) s 600 Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) s 9, s 116, s 129 Justices Act 1886 (Qld) s 114 Attorney-General (Qld) v Lawrence [2013] QCA 364 cited Clare v R (1994) 2 Qd R 619; [1993] QCA 558 cited Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24 cited Grassby v The Queen (1989) 1…
R v Nerbas [2011] QCA 199
Citation 2 (Para 1)

…hey must be such as to indicate that the plea of guilty was not “really attributable to a genuine consciousness of guilt.” [24][2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199 [25][2004] QCA 493 at [11]…
R v McGregor [2009] QCA 308
Citation 3 (Para 1)

…Gregor .[8] The other is to look for some measure of control or management over the place in question: Thow v Campbell [9] ; R v Von Snarski .[10] [8][2009] QCA 308 [9][1997] 2 Qd R 324 [10][2001] QCA 71 at [21]…
R v GV [2006] QCA 394
Citation 4

…ner v R (1996) 184 CLR 501; [1995] HCA 41 cited R v Amanatidis [2001] NSWCCA 400 cited R v Bridges [1986] 2 Qd R 391 cited R v GV [2006] QCA 394 cited R v McGregor [2009] QCA 308 cited R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493 cited R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199 cited R v Phillips and Lawrence [1967] Qd R 237 ci…
R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493
Citation 5 (Para 1)

…to indicate that the plea of guilty was not “really attributable to a genuine consciousness of guilt.” [24][2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199 [25][2004] QCA 493 at [11]…
R v Amanatidis [2001] NSWCCA 400
Citation 6

…ted Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1; [1989] HCA 45 cited Meissner v R (1996) 184 CLR 501; [1995] HCA 41 cited R v Amanatidis [2001] NSWCCA 400 cited R v Bridges [1986] 2 Qd R 391 cited R v GV [2006] QCA 394 cited R v McGregor [2009] QCA 308 cited R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493 cited R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362; […
R v Von Snarski [2001] QCA 71
Citation 7 (Para 1)

…e measure of control or management over the place in question: Thow v Campbell [9] ; R v Von Snarski .[10] [8][2009] QCA 308 [9][1997] 2 Qd R 324 [10][2001] QCA 71 at [21]…
Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [1996] HCA 24
Citation 8 (Para 1)

…ons Parliament can do as it pleases.[13] Those exceptions are not engaged here. [13] Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24 per Dawson J at p 72 – 76.…
Maxwell v The Queen [1996] HCA 46
Citation 9 (Para 1)

…Court in Meissner v R [11] said that “a Court will act on a plea of guilty when it is entered in open court by a person of full age…”.[12] [11](1996) 184 CLR 501; [1995] HCA 41 [12] Ibid at [22] – Mr Winning’s emphasis…
Meissner v the Queen [1995] HCA 41
Citation 10

…[22](1995) 184 CLR 132 at 141 per Brennan, Toohey and McHugh JJ…
R v Clare [1993] QCA 558
Citation 11 (Para 1)

…dence is as consistent with Ms Shipley entering the truck unaware the drugs were present as any other hypothesis. [6]See Clare v R (1994) 2 Qd R 619; [1993] QCA 558 where it was held that the prosecution was not required to prove that the accused knew the powder in his custody was heroin when he claimed he though…
Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation v The Commonwealth [1986] HCA 47
Citation 12 (Para 1)

…26 per Gaudron J [15] Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation v The Commonwealth (1986) 161 CLR 88 at 96; [1986] HCA 47; Liyanage v The Queen [1967] 1 AC 259…
He Kaw Teh v The Queen [1985] HCA 43
Citation 13

…criminal law involves physical control or custody of the thing plus knowledge that you have it in your control or custody ( He Kaw The v The Queen (1985) 157 CLR 523 at 537-9, 546, 585-7, 599-600). The physical control or custody may be shared, but must be control or custody to the exclusion of other persons or pers…
Grassby v the Queen [1989] HCA 45
Citation 14 (Para 1)

…ved the exercise of an executive or ministerial function: see Grassby v The Queen [16] and the authorities discussed. [16](1989) 168 CLR 1 at 11; [1989] HCA 45 per Dawson J (Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Toohey JJ agreeing)…
[1967] 1 AC 259 [1967] 1 AC 259
Citation 15 (Para 1)

…ilding Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation v The Commonwealth (1986) 161 CLR 88 at 96; [1986] HCA 47; Liyanage v The Queen [1967] 1 AC 259…

Legislation Cited

Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) 116, 9
3 mentions (from Para 1)
Justices Act 1886 (Qld) 114
2 mentions (from Para 1)

CITATION:	R v Shipley [2014] QSC 299
PARTIES:	THE QUEEN (applicant) And SHIPLEY, Kathleen May (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	SUP37/14
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	10 December 2014
DELIVERED AT:	Rockhampton
HEARING DATE:	3 December 2014
JUDGE:	McMeekin J
ORDERS:	1. Order that pleas of guilty be entered to the charges on indictment SUP37/14 notwithstanding the respondent’s pleas of not guilty.
CATCHWORDS	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – PLEAS – OTHER MATTERS – where the respondent pleaded guilty to possession of drug offences by way of registry committal – where the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle where drugs were found – where the respondent denied knowledge of the drugs – where the respondent subsequently pleaded not guilty to the charges on arraignment in the Supreme Court – where the Crown seeks a direction that a guilty plea should be entered – whether the respondent can withdraw a plea of guilty entered by way of a registry committal Criminal Code 1899 (Qld) s 600 Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld) s 9, s 116, s 129 Justices Act 1886 (Qld) s 114 Attorney-General (Qld) v Lawrence [2013] QCA 364 cited Clare v R (1994) 2 Qd R 619; [1993] QCA 558 cited Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1996) 189 CLR 51; [1996] HCA 24 cited Grassby v The Queen (1989) 168 CLR 1; [1989] HCA 45 cited Meissner v R (1996) 184 CLR 501; [1995] HCA 41 cited R v Amanatidis [2001] NSWCCA 400 cited R v Bridges [1986] 2 Qd R 391 cited R v GV [2006] QCA 394 cited R v McGregor [2009] QCA 308 cited R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493 cited R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199 cited R v Phillips and Lawrence [1967] Qd R 237 cited R v Smythe [1997] 2 Qd R 223 cited R v Solway [1984] 2 Qd R 75 cited R v Von Snarski. [2001] QCA 71 cited R v Warneminde [1978] Qd R 371 cited Thow v Campbell [1997] 2 Qd R 324 cited
COUNSEL:	A Baker for the applicant D Winning (Sol) for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the applicant Winning Lawyers for the respondent