R v Ua - [2007] QCA 41

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v UA [2007] QCA 41

PARTIES:

R
v
UA
(appellant/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 221 of 2006
DC No 1979 of 2006

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction & Sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

16 February 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

5 February 2007

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Keane JA and Mullins J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

1. Appeal against conviction dismissed

2. Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL DISMISSED - where appellant convicted of two counts of indecent dealing and one count of permitting self to be indecently dealt with - where child under 12 and lineal descendant of appellant - where appellant argued the jury placed undue weight on evidence given by complainant under s 21AK and s 93A Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) - where appellant argued evidence was inconsistent - whether conviction unjust and contrary to law

CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE - APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS - APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE - WHEN REFUSED - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES - where appellant sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment on each count to be served concurrently - whether sentence manifestly excessive

Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), s 21AK and s 93A

R v M and Attorney-General (Qld) [1997] QCA 280, CA No 261 of 1997, 6 August 1997, distinguished

R v M [1999] QCA 118; CA No 445 of 1998, 13 April 1999, distinguished

COUNSEL:

The appellant appeared on his own behalf
D L Meredith for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

MCMURDO P: The appeal against conviction should be dismissed and the application for leave to appeal against sentence refused for the reasons given by Keane JA.

KEANE JA: On 27 July 2006, the appellant was convicted upon the verdict of a jury of two counts of indecent dealing with a child under 12 years of age. The complainant child, T, was the appellant's daughter who was born on 24 August 1996. The appellant was also convicted on one count of permitting himself to be indecently dealt with by the same child. The offences were alleged to have occurred between August and December 2003.

The appellant was sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment in respect of each offence, the terms to be served concurrently.

The appellant appeals against each conviction on the ground that it "is unjust and contrary to law". The appellant also sought leave to appeal against the sentence which was imposed on the ground that it was "manifestly…

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 Ua

Details

AGLC: R v Ua [2007] QCA 41
Case: [2007] QCA 41
Decision Date: 16 February 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Ua, the appellant was convicted of two counts of indecent dealing and one count of permitting himself to be indecently dealt with by a child under the age of 12, who was also a lineal descendant of the appellant. The matter was heard in the Queensland Court of Appeal. The appellant sought to appeal against his conviction on the grounds that the jury placed undue weight on the evidence given by the complainant under sections 21AK and 93A of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) and that the evidence was inconsistent. The appellant further argued that his conviction was unjust and contrary to the law.

The court was required to determine whether the jury's verdict was unreasonable or insupportable and whether it was unjust or contrary to the law. The appellant submitted that the jury placed undue weight on the complainant's evidence and failed to consider other evidence presented at the trial. The court considered the evidence and submissions made by the parties and found that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable or insupportable. The court held that the jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence and that there was no inconsistency in the evidence that would warrant a new trial.

The appeal against conviction was dismissed, and the application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused. The court held that the jury's verdict was open to them on the evidence before them, and there was no miscarriage of justice. The appellant's argument that the jury placed undue weight on the complainant's evidence was rejected, and the conviction was upheld. The court did not find any error in the trial judge's directions to the jury or in the sentence imposed.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Appeal against conviction dismissed

2. Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused

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 UA [2007] QCA 41
PARTIES:	R v UA (appellant/applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 221 of 2006 DC No 1979 of 2006
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction & Sentence
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	16 February 2007
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	5 February 2007
JUDGES:	McMurdo P, Keane JA and Mullins J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	1. Appeal against conviction dismissed 2. Application for leave to appeal against sentence refused
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - PARTICULAR GROUNDS – UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE VERDICT – WHERE APPEAL DISMISSED - where appellant convicted of two counts of indecent dealing and one count of permitting self to be indecently dealt with - where child under 12 and lineal descendant of appellant - where appellant argued the jury placed undue weight on evidence given by complainant under s 21AK and s 93A Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) - where appellant argued evidence was inconsistent - whether conviction unjust and contrary to law CRIMINAL LAW - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION - APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL - APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE - APPEAL BY CONVICTED PERSONS - APPLICATIONS TO REDUCE SENTENCE - WHEN REFUSED - PARTICULAR OFFENCES - OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON - SEXUAL OFFENCES - where appellant sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment on each count to be served concurrently - whether sentence manifestly excessive Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), s 21AK and s 93A R v M and Attorney-General (Qld) [1997] QCA 280, CA No 261 of 1997, 6 August 1997, distinguished R v M [1999] QCA 118; CA No 445 of 1998, 13 April 1999, distinguished
COUNSEL:	The appellant appeared on his own behalf D L Meredith for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The appellant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent