Legal Research
Cases
R v Verrall

R v Verrall

Case [2012] QCA 310 13 November 2012

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310

PARTIES:

R
v
VERRALL, Steven Peter
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 169 of 2011
SC No 1500 of 2009

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

13 November 2012

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

10 August 2012

JUDGES:

Holmes JA and Philippides and Douglas JJ
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – PLEAS – GENERAL PLEAS – PLEA OF GUILTY – EFFECT – where the appellant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, 14 counts of importing border-controlled drugs and one count of dealing with the proceeds of crime – where the appellant sought at first instance to have his pleas of guilty set aside – where the application was refused – where the appellant seeks to appeal – where the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code (Qld) provide a strong indication that conviction occurs when the allocutus is administered – whether the appeal is properly brought against the conviction or against the refusal to set aside the pleas of guilty – whether there exists any source of jurisdiction for the appeal outside Ch. 67 of the Code – whether there has been a miscarriage of justice

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), s 211
Constitution of Queensland Act 2001 (Qld), s 58
Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), s 307, s 400
Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 590AA, s 648, s 649, s 650, s 668A, s 668D, s 668E
Criminal Practice Rules 1999 (Qld), r 51
Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld), s 5
Judicature Act 1876 (Qld), s 10, s 19
Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld), s 254
Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld), s 9, s 11, s 62, s 69

Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd [No 1] (1981) 147 CLR 246, [1981] HCA 20, considered
Chen v R [2012] NSWCCA 53, cited
Director of Public Prosecutions v Wentworth [1996] QCA 333, cited
Ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303, considered
Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46, considered
Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132, [1995] HCA 41, considered
Nudd v The Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered
R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered
R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited
R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112; [1993] QCA 224, cited
R v Foster; Ex parte Gillies [1937] St R Qd 67, considered
R v Long (No 1) [2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318, considered
R v Lowrie [1998] 2 Qd R 579; [1997] QCA 434, considered
R v Lowrie and Ross [2000] 2 Qd R 529, [1999] QCA 305

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 Verrall

Details

AGLC: R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310
Case: [2012] QCA 310
Decision Date: 13 November 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Verrall, the appellant was convicted and sentenced following pleas of guilty to various drug-related offences, including trafficking in dangerous drugs, importing border-controlled drugs, and dealing with the proceeds of crime. The appellant applied to have his pleas of guilty set aside, which was refused, leading to an appeal to the Court of Appeal. The central issue was whether the appeal was properly brought against the conviction or the refusal to set aside the pleas of guilty. Additionally, the court had to determine if there was any jurisdictional basis for the appeal outside Chapter 67 of the Criminal Code (Qld), and if there had been a miscarriage of justice.

The court examined the statutory framework and noted that the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code (Qld) strongly suggest that conviction occurs upon the administration of allocutus. It concluded that the appeal was not properly brought against the conviction itself but rather against the refusal to set aside the pleas of guilty. The court also found that there was no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal outside Chapter 67 of the Code. Furthermore, the court was satisfied that there was no miscarriage of justice in the decision to refuse the application to set aside the pleas of guilty.

Given the findings, the court dismissed the appeal. The reasoning and legal principles applied led to the conclusion that the appeal was misconceived and did not provide a valid basis for overturning the decision of the lower court. The appellant's application to set aside the pleas of guilty was correctly refused, and no miscarriage of justice occurred.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310

Most Recent Citation

R v BCJ [2012] QCA 316

Cases citing this decision · 10 of 10 shown

R v Munro
[2024] QCA 136

…4] QCA 493, cited R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362; [2011] QCA 199, considered R v Verrall [2013] 1 Qd R 587; [2012] QCA 310, considered R v Wade [2012] 2 Qd R 31; [2011] QCA 289, cited The Queen v Munro [2022] QDC 80, cited White v R (2022) 110 NSWLR 163; [2022] NSWCCA 241, considered COUNSEL: The appellant appeared…
R v BGT and BA
[2024] QSCPR 6 Para 1

…On the other hand, in R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310, Holmes CJ expressed the view that sections 648, 649 and 650 of the Criminal Code support the view that conviction occurs, at the latest, when the defendant is called on, as section 648 prescribes – that is, when the allocutus is administered.…
Hutson v Australian Securities and Investments Commission
[2022] QSC 243 Para 8

…e Court, such as R v Woodman [60] and R v Verrall. [61] [60][2010] QCA 162, [18] (White JA, McMurdo P and Fraser JA agreeing). [61][2013] 1 Qd R 587; [2012] QCA 310, [14] (Holmes JA, Philippides and Douglas JJ agreeing).…
R v Whitehead
[2020] QCA 215

…362; [2011] QCA 199, cited R v NQ [2013] QCA 402, cited R v Sonter [2008] QCA 292, cited R v Verrall [2013] 1 Qd R 587; [2012] QCA 310, cited COUNSEL: The applicant appeared on his own behalf J A Geary for the respondent SOLICITORS: The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensl…
R v Shipley
[2016] QCA 23 Para 2

…appellant filed a notice of appeal against the convictions.[3] Sentencing of the appellant has been adjourned pending the outcome of this appeal. [2][2012] QCA 310; [2013] 1 Qd R 587 at [5]. [3]AB98-99.…
R v Verrall
[2015] QCA 72 Para 1

…applied unsuccessfully to set aside his pleas on 30 May 2011. He appealed, and judgment was given against him on 13 November 2012.[4] [4] R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310.…
R v Schipp
[2013] QCA 197 Para 1

…The effect of that process was described by Holmes JA in R v Verrall [2] as follows: [2] R v Verrall [2013] 1 Qd R 587, 590; [2012] QCA 310 (footnotes omitted).…
High Court Bulletin
[2013] HCAB 4

…Supreme Court of Queensland (Court of Appeal) [2012] QCA 310…
Steven Peter Verrall v The Queen
[2013] HCASL 62 Para 2

…e of his understanding of the effect of a plea of guilty as "incredible". His Honour refused to grant the applicant the leave sought. [4] R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310 at [28].…
R v BCJ
[2012] QCA 316 Para 1

…iction. R v Verrall [1] makes it clear that the appeal is properly brought against the conviction, not the primary judge’s order. [1] R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310.…

View all 10 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 18 of 18 shown

R v Wade
[2011] QCA 289

…, considered R v Shillingsworth [1985] 1 Qd R 537, considered R v Skase [1995] 2 Qd R 297, cited R v Wade [2012] 2 Qd R 31, [2011] QCA 289, considered R v Woodman [2010] QCA 162, cited R v Verrall [2011] QCA 206, related COUNSEL: The appellant appeared on his own behalf G R Rice SC for the respondent SOLICITORS:…
R v Verrall
[2011] QCA 206 Para 1

…e primary judge’s decision, as well, of course, as the merits of the appellant’s argument that the pleas should be set aside. [1] R v Verrall [2011] QCA 206.…
R v Nerbas
[2011] QCA 199 Para 1

…ys in which the court could manifest its acceptance of a guilty plea, one of which was by administration of the allocutus.[6] [2][2012] 1 Qd R 362, [2011] QCA 199. [3](1996) 184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46. [4]At 509. [5]At 531-2. [6]At 520.…
Re: N (a solicitor)
[2010] QSC 267 Para 1

…passages cited had any bearing on the position of a defendant pleading guilty. [27][2012] NSWCCA 53. [28](2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9. [29][2010] QSC 267. [30]225 ALR 161, 176, [53]. [31]At [39].…
R v Woodman
[2010] QCA 162

…1 Qd R 537, considered R v Skase [1995] 2 Qd R 297, cited R v Wade [2012] 2 Qd R 31, [2011] QCA 289, considered R v Woodman [2010] QCA 162, cited R v Verrall [2011] QCA 206, related COUNSEL: The appellant appeared on his own behalf G R Rice SC for the respondent SOLICITORS: The appellant appeared on his own behal…
R v SBJ
[2009] QCA 100

…c [1964] Qd R 561, cited R v Queensland Television Limited, ex parte Attorney-General [1983] 2 Qd R 648, considered R v SBJ [2009] QCA 100, considered R v Shillingsworth [1985] 1 Qd R 537, considered R v Skase [1995] 2 Qd R 297, cited R v Wade [2012] 2 Qd R 31, [2011] QCA 289, considered R v Woodman [2010] QCA 16…
Nudd v The Queen
[2006] HCA 9

…184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46, considered Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132, [1995] HCA 41, considered Nudd v The Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited R v Drozd (1993)…
R v Mundraby
[2004] QCA 493 Para 1

…there was error in each case turned (impliedly in Nerbas ,[13] expressly in Mundraby [14]) on whether there had been a miscarriage of justice. [12][2004] QCA 493. [13][2011] QCA 199 at [55]-[57]. [14][2004] QCA 493 at [16], [28].…
R v Corrigan
[2001] QCA 401

…LR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112; [1993] QCA 224, cited R v Foster; Ex parte Gillies [1937] St R Qd 67, considered R v Long (No 1) [2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318, co…
R v Long (No 1)
[2001] QCA 318 Para 1

…ncus JA (tacitly) nor Davies JA (expressly) had considered s 69(1) to provide any right of appeal against such an order. [22][2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318.…
R v Lowrie and Ross
[1999] QCA 305

…[2001] QCA 318, considered R v Lowrie [1998] 2 Qd R 579; [1997] QCA 434, considered R v Lowrie and Ross [2000] 2 Qd R 529, [1999] QCA 305, considered R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493, considered Re: N (a solicitor) [2010] QSC 267, considered R v Nerbas [2012] 1 Qd R 362, [2011] QCA 199, considered R v Phillips and La…
R v Lowrie
[1997] QCA 434

…s [1937] St R Qd 67, considered R v Long (No 1) [2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318, considered R v Lowrie [1998] 2 Qd R 579; [1997] QCA 434, considered R v Lowrie and Ross [2000] 2 Qd R 529, [1999] QCA 305, considered R v Mundraby [2004] QCA 493, considered Re: N (a solicitor) [2010] QSC 267, considered R v Nerbas…
Director of Public Prosecutions v Wentworth
[1996] QCA 333 Para 1

…urt of Appeal had assumed the existence of such a jurisdiction. [21] R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112 and Director of Public Prosecutions v Wentworth [1996] QCA 333.…
Maxwell v The Queen
[1996] HCA 46

…CA 53, cited Director of Public Prosecutions v Wentworth [1996] QCA 333, cited Ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303, considered Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46, considered Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132, [1995] HCA 41, considered Nudd v The Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9…
Meissner v the Queen
[1995] HCA 41

…303, considered Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46, considered Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132, [1995] HCA 41, considered Nudd v The Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v…
R v Collins; Ex parte Attorney-General
[1994] QCA 467

…e Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112; [1993] QCA 224, cited R v Foster; Ex parte Gillies [1937] St R Qd 67, considered R v Long (No…
R v Drozd
[1993] QCA 224

…-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112; [1993] QCA 224, cited R v Foster; Ex parte Gillies [1937] St R Qd 67, considered R v Long (No 1) [2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318, considered R v Lowrie [1998] 2 Qd R 579; [1997] QCA 434, c…
Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd (No 1)
[1981] HCA 20 Para 1

…ich no appeal lies. [24] R v Popovic [1964] Qd R 561 at 567; R v Phillips & Lawrence [1967] Qd R 237 per Hart J at 288-289. [25](1981) 147 CLR 246, [1981] HCA 20. [26]Per Gibbs CJ at 248, per Mason J at 256.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 7

Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld)
211 2 mentions
Constitution of Queensland 2001 (Qld)
58 2 mentions
Criminal Practice Rules 1999 (Qld)
51 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Judicature Act 1876 (Qld)
10 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld)
254 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld)
9 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld)
5 1 mention

CITATION:	R v Verrall [2012] QCA 310
PARTIES:	R v VERRALL, Steven Peter (appellant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 169 of 2011 SC No 1500 of 2009
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction
ORIGINATING COURT:	Supreme Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	13 November 2012
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	10 August 2012
JUDGES:	Holmes JA and Philippides and Douglas JJ Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – PLEAS – GENERAL PLEAS – PLEA OF GUILTY – EFFECT – where the appellant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, 14 counts of importing border-controlled drugs and one count of dealing with the proceeds of crime – where the appellant sought at first instance to have his pleas of guilty set aside – where the application was refused – where the appellant seeks to appeal – where the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code (Qld) provide a strong indication that conviction occurs when the allocutus is administered – whether the appeal is properly brought against the conviction or against the refusal to set aside the pleas of guilty – whether there exists any source of jurisdiction for the appeal outside Ch. 67 of the Code – whether there has been a miscarriage of justice Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), s 211 Constitution of Queensland Act 2001 (Qld), s 58 Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), s 307, s 400 Criminal Code 1899 (Qld), s 590AA, s 648, s 649, s 650, s 668A, s 668D, s 668E Criminal Practice Rules 1999 (Qld), r 51 Drugs Misuse Act 1986 (Qld), s 5 Judicature Act 1876 (Qld), s 10, s 19 Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld), s 254 Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 (Qld), s 9, s 11, s 62, s 69 Carr v Finance Corporation of Australia Ltd [No 1] (1981) 147 CLR 246, [1981] HCA 20, considered Chen v R [2012] NSWCCA 53, cited Director of Public Prosecutions v Wentworth [1996] QCA 333, cited Ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303, considered Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501, [1996] HCA 46, considered Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132, [1995] HCA 41, considered Nudd v The Queen (2006) 80 ALJR 614; (2006) 225 ALR 161, [2006] HCA 9, considered R v Collins; ex parte A-G (Qld) [1996] 1 Qd R 631, [1994] QCA 467, considered R v Corrigan [2001] QCA 401, cited R v Drozd (1993) 67 A Crim R 112; [1993] QCA 224, cited R v Foster; Ex parte Gillies [1937] St R Qd 67, considered R v Long (No 1) [2002] 1 Qd R 662, [2001] QCA 318, considered R v Lowrie [1998] 2 Qd R 579; [1997] QCA 434, considered R v Lowrie and Ross [2000] 2 Qd R 529, [1999] QCA 305