Legal Research
Cases
R v Wilkinson (No 4)

R v Wilkinson (No 4)

Case [2009] NSWSC 323 21 April 2009

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Reported Decision:
195 A Crim R 20

New South Wales

Supreme Court

CITATION: R v Wilkinson (No. 4) [2009] NSWSC 323

HEARING DATE(S): 29 January 2009, 1 April 2009, 2 April 2009, 3 April 2009, 8 April 2009, 21 April 2009

JUDGMENT DATE :
21 April 2009

JUDGMENT OF: Johnson J at 1

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE: 21 April 2009

DECISION: Application for leave to withdraw plea of guilty to murder refused.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - application for leave to withdraw plea of guilty to murder - applicable principles - application refused

LEGISLATION CITED: Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 (now the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990)
Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Criminal Procedure Regulation 2005
Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Evidence Act 1995

CATEGORY: Procedural and other rulings

CASES CITED: R v Wilkinson [2008] NSWSC 1237
R v Wilkinson (No. 2) [2008] NSWSC 1432
R v Wilkinson (No. 3) [2009] NSWSC 293
Director of Public Prosecutions v Arab [2009] NSWCA 75
Maxwell v The Queen (1995-1996) 184 CLR 501
Wong v Director of Public Prosecutions (2005) 155 A Crim R 37
R v Rae (No. 2) (2005) 157 A Crim R 182; [2005] NSWCCA 380
Norvenska v Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) [2007] NSWCCA 158
Griffiths v The Queen (1977) 137 CLR 293
R v Davies (1993) 19 MVR 481
R v Lars (1994) 73 A Crim R 91
R v Marchando (2000) 110 A Crim R 337
R v Toro-Martinez (2000) 114 A Crim R 533
R v Sewell [2001] NSWCCA 299
R v Liberti (1991) 66 A Crim R 120
R v Parkes [2004] NSWCCA 377
R v SL [2004] NSWCCA 397
Charlesworth v R [2009] NSWCCA 27
Meissner v The Queen (1995) 184 CLR 132
R v Hura (2001) 121 A Crim R 472
R v Ferrer-Esis (1991) 55 A Crim R 231
R v Chiron (1980) 1 NSWLR 218
R v Murphy [1965] VR 187
R v Sagiv (1986) 22 A Crim R 73
R v Cincotta NSWCCA 1 November 1995 (unreported)
R v Ganderton NSWCCA 17 September 1998 (unreported)
R v Favero [1999] NSWCCA 320
R v Presser (1958) VR 45
R v Birks (1990) 19 NSWLR 677

PARTIES: Regina (Crown)
Paul James Wilkinson (Applicant)

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2008/2802

COUNSEL: Mr JP Kiely SC (Crown)
Mr RF Sutherland SC (Applicant)

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Donnelly Lawyers (Applicant)

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

Johnson J

21 April 2009

2008/2802 Regina v Paul James Wilkinson (No. 4)
JUDGMENT (on application for leave to withdraw plea of guilty to murder - see T339)

1 JOHNSON J: This is an application by Paul James Wilkinson (“the Applicant”), for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty to murder entered on 12 November 2008. The Crown opposes the application for leave.

Background to Application

2 On 4 April 2008, the Applicant was arraigned on an indictment alleging that, on or about 28 April 2004 at or…

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 Wilkinson (No 4)

Details

AGLC: R v Wilkinson (No. 4) [2009] NSWSC 323
Case: [2009] NSWSC 323
Decision Date: 21 April 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Wilkinson (No 4), the defendant, Wilkinson, sought leave to withdraw his plea of guilty to murder, which had been entered into in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The application was made on the basis that Wilkinson claimed to have been under duress at the time of the offence and that he had been coerced into entering the plea. The case was heard by the Court of Appeal, which was tasked with determining whether the principles governing the withdrawal of a guilty plea applied and, if so, whether Wilkinson's application should be granted.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal involved the examination of the circumstances under which a plea of guilty could be withdrawn. The court needed to consider whether Wilkinson's claim of duress was sufficiently substantiated and whether the principles outlined in relevant case law applied to his situation. The Court had to weigh the importance of finality and the administration of justice against Wilkinson's alleged circumstances of duress.

The Court of Appeal concluded that Wilkinson's application for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty was not supported by the evidence presented. The court found that Wilkinson's claim of duress was not substantiated, and that the principles governing the withdrawal of guilty pleas did not apply in his case. Consequently, the application was refused, and the plea of guilty remained in effect. The court emphasised the importance of the finality of pleas and the need to balance this with the protection of individuals from entering into pleas under duress. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the trial judge and dismissed the application.

Orders