R v. Willey - [2008] QCA 318

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Willey [2008] QCA 318

PARTIES:

R
v
WILLEY, Anthony John
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 182 of 2008
DC No 65 of 2008

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Extension (Sentence & Conviction)

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Mackay

DELIVERED ON:

10 October 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

24 September 2008

JUDGES:

Keane JA, Jones and Atkinson JJ
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Application for extension of time dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PRACTICE: AFTER CRIMINAL APPEAL LEGISLATION – MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – QUEENSLAND – PROCEDURE – EXTENSION OF TIME, NOTICE OF APPEAL AND ABANDONMENT – where the applicant first gave notice of his intention to appeal against conviction and sentence three weeks after the expiration of the time limitation – where the applicant's explanation for the delay is not entirely satisfactory – whether the circumstances are such as to warrant in the interests of justice the grant of an extension of time within which to appeal

R v Cosh[2007] QCA 156, applied
R v Newman (2007) 172 A Crim R 171; [2007] QCA 198, applied
R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667; [1998] QCA 304, applied

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
A J Edwards for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

KEANE JA: On 6 May 2008 the applicant was convicted upon the verdict of a jury of 10 serious offences, including five counts of rape, two counts of attempted rape and one count of assault with intent to commit rape. On 8 May 2008 he was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment in respect of the rape counts, and eight years imprisonment to be served concurrently in respect of the counts of attempted rape and the count of assault with intent to commit rape. He was sentenced to lesser concurrent terms of imprisonment in respect of the other offences. In respect of the offences of rape, the learned sentencing judge made a declaration that they were serious violent offences under s 161B of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld).

The Crown case at trial was that on 8 October 2006 the applicant forced his way into the hotel room of a young woman who was visiting Mackay. She did not know him. He subjected her to a two and a half hour ordeal in which he assaulted her and forced her to engage in oral sex on five occasions, threatening to kill her if she sought to escape and choking her to the point where she was short of breath. Ultimately, she was able to escape from him.

The applicant was 49 years old at the time.

The applicant now seeks an extension of time within which to commence the processes of appeal…

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. Willey

Details

AGLC: R v Willey [2008] QCA 318
Case: [2008] QCA 318
Decision Date: 10 October 2008

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of R v. Willey involved an application by the appellant, Willey, seeking an extension of time to appeal against his conviction and sentence. Willey had initially notified his intention to appeal three weeks after the expiration of the time limit set by the Criminal Appeal Act. The appellant's explanation for the delay was not entirely satisfactory, and the court needed to determine whether the circumstances warranted an extension of time in the interests of justice.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the delay in notifying the intention to appeal and the inadequacy of the explanation provided by Willey warranted an extension of time under the relevant legislative provisions. The court had to weigh the principles of fairness and the public interest in the finality of criminal judgments against the appellant's circumstances and the potential merits of the appeal.

The court held that while the appellant's explanation for the delay was not entirely satisfactory, the circumstances did not warrant an extension of time. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to statutory time limits for appeals to ensure the finality of judgments and to maintain the integrity of the criminal justice process. The court also noted that the appellant had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances that would justify an extension. Consequently, the application for an extension of time was dismissed, and the appeal was not allowed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for extension of time 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.

CITATION:	R v Willey [2008] QCA 318
PARTIES:	R v WILLEY, Anthony John (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 182 of 2008 DC No 65 of 2008
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Extension (Sentence & Conviction)
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Mackay
DELIVERED ON:	10 October 2008
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	24 September 2008
JUDGES:	Keane JA, Jones and Atkinson JJ Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
ORDER:	Application for extension of time dismissed
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PRACTICE: AFTER CRIMINAL APPEAL LEGISLATION – MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – QUEENSLAND – PROCEDURE – EXTENSION OF TIME, NOTICE OF APPEAL AND ABANDONMENT – where the applicant first gave notice of his intention to appeal against conviction and sentence three weeks after the expiration of the time limitation – where the applicant's explanation for the delay is not entirely satisfactory – whether the circumstances are such as to warrant in the interests of justice the grant of an extension of time within which to appeal R v Cosh[2007] QCA 156, applied R v Newman (2007) 172 A Crim R 171; [2007] QCA 198, applied R v Tait [1999] 2 Qd R 667; [1998] QCA 304, applied
COUNSEL:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf A J Edwards for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent