R v WBJ

[2020] QCA 32

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v WBJ [2020] QCA 32

PARTIES:

R
v
WBJ
(appellant/applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 285 of 2017
CA No 16 of 2018
DC No 2443 of 2017

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction & Sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane – Date of Conviction: 24 November 2017; Date of Sentence: 24 January 2018 (Martin SC DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

3 March 2020

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

25 November 2019

JUDGES:

Sofronoff P and Fraser and Philippides JJA

ORDERS:

1.   Appeal dismissed.

2.   Application for leave to appeal against sentence is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL –VERDICT UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE HAVING REGARD TO EVIDENCE – APPEAL DISMISSED – where the appellant was convicted on 12 counts of various violent offences, with the aggravating factor of these offences being domestic violence offences – where these offences included grievous bodily harm, assault, deprivation of liberty, torture and unlawfully throwing a destructive substance (count 6) and a corrosive fluid (count 8) – where in count 6 the appellant poured/threw caustic soda over the complainant, with intent to maim her – where in count 8 the appellant poured/threw petrol over the complainant, with intent to maim her – whether caustic soda in count 6 was a destructive substance – whether petrol in count 8 was a corrosive fluid – whether the verdicts on counts 6 and 8 were unreasonable and insupportable on the evidence

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL –MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE – PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES NOT AMOUNTING TO MISCARRIAGE – MISDIRECTION OR NON-DIRECTION – where count 8 concerned the appellant throwing/pouring a corrosive fluid, namely petrol, over the complainant – where the trial judge directed the jury regarding a destructive substance rather than a corrosive fluid – where no re-direction was sought at trial – whether the appellant has lost a real chance of acquittal through that misdirection – whether the misdirection resulted in a miscarriage of justice

Criminal Code (Qld), s 317

Alford v Magee (1952) 85 CLR 437; [1952] HCA 3, cited
Krakouer v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 202; [1998] HCA 43, cited
R v Storey (1978) 140 CLR 364; [1978] HCA 39, cited
Simic v The Queen (1980) 144 CLR 319; [1980] HCA 25, cited
TKWJ v The Queen (2002) 212 CLR 124; [2002] HCA 46, cited
Wilde v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365; [1988] HCA 6, cited

COUNSEL:

M Horvath, with N Edridge, for the appellant/applicant (pro bono)
D Balic for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Jeff Horsey Solicitors for the appellant/applicant (pro bono)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. SOFRONOFF P:  The appellant was found guilty of 12 counts after a trial.[1]  The counts were as follows:

   [1]He was acquitted on three other counts:

   Count 1: unlawful assault occasioning bodily harm

   Count 4: common assault

   Count 9: threats

   Count 2:           grievous bodily harm

   Count 3:           unlawful assault occasioning bodily harm…