R v WP

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v WP [2006] QCA 36

PARTIES:

R
v
WP
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 278 of 2005
DC No 171 of 2004

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Application for Extension of Time

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:

17 February 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

17 February 2006

JUDGES:

Williams and Keane JJA and Muir J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDER:

The time within which the notice of appeal be lodged be extended to the 28^th of October 2005

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – WHERE EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL - where the applicant was convicted after trial of causing grievous bodily harm to his daughter – the applicant seeks an extension of time within which to appeal – where there may be relevant new evidence in favour of the applicant – whether to grant an extension of time

COUNSEL:

The applicant appeared on his own behalf
M J Copley for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

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

WILLIAMS JA: The applicant was convicted after a trial on the 8th of June 2004 of causing grievous bodily harm to his daughter between 15 April 2003 and 12 May 2003. The case against him was a circumstantial one.

The applicant has now lodged with the Court a notice of appeal against conviction on the 28th of October 2005 which is well out of time. This is an application to extend the time within which to appeal to that date.

The application has been brought by the applicant himself and in consequence the material is in a somewhat vague form; however it does raise the issue as to whether or not the applicant's wife was the person who mistreated the child and occasioned the injuries in question. The material suggests that there may be new evidence supporting that proposition.

Mr Copley, who has appeared for the Director of Public Prosecutions has quite properly conceded that the matters raised by the applicant need to be further examined and indeed the Director of Public Prosecutions has already asked the police to obtain relevant statements.

Once the extension of time is granted the applicant will be able to apply for Legal Aid and that will then enable Legal Aid to fully investigate the matter and to assist the Court in determining whether or not there is now available evidence which puts in question the guilt of the applicant.

In the circumstances there will be an order that the time within which the notice of appeal be lodged be extended to the 28th of October 2005.

KEANE JA: I agree.

MUIR J: I agree.

...

‑‑‑‑‑

The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia and involved an applicant who had been convicted of causing grievous bodily harm to his daughter. The primary legal issue before the Court was whether to grant an extension of time to the applicant to lodge a notice of appeal. The Court was required to consider whether there were sufficient grounds for the extension, particularly in light of potential new evidence that could be favourable to the applicant.

The Court considered the nature of the evidence presented in the case, which was largely circumstantial. The Court noted that the evidence was of such a nature that it might lead to different conclusions, particularly if new evidence came to light. The Court emphasised the importance of ensuring that justice is served and that all relevant evidence is considered. The Court was satisfied that there were compelling reasons for extending the time limit, as there was a real possibility that new evidence could be presented which might alter the outcome of the case.

In light of the above, the Court decided to grant the applicant's request for an extension of time to lodge a notice of appeal. The Court set the new deadline for lodging the notice of appeal as the 28th of October 2005. This decision was made in the interest of justice, to ensure that all relevant evidence is considered and that the applicant has a fair opportunity to appeal the conviction. The Court did not address any other issues in the appeal.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established

CITATION:	R v WP [2006] QCA 36
PARTIES:	R v WP (applicant)
FILE NO/S:	CA No 278 of 2005 DC No 171 of 2004
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Application for Extension of Time
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court at Brisbane
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:	17 February 2006
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	17 February 2006
JUDGES:	Williams and Keane JJA and Muir J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the orders made
ORDER:	The time within which the notice of appeal be lodged be extended to the 28^th of October 2005
CATCHWORDS:	APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AND INQUIRY AFTER CONVICTION – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS – WHERE EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL - where the applicant was convicted after trial of causing grievous bodily harm to his daughter – the applicant seeks an extension of time within which to appeal – where there may be relevant new evidence in favour of the applicant – whether to grant an extension of time
COUNSEL:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf M J Copley for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent