Re Luke Adam Fuller - [2010] QDC 210

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Re Luke Adam Fuller [2010] QDC 210

PARTIES:

LUKE ADAM FULLER

FILE NO/S:

No 1392 of 2010

DIVISION:

Applications

PROCEEDING:

Bail Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court

DELIVERED ON:

12 May 2010 ex tempore

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

12 May 2010

JUDGE:

Andrews DCJ

ORDER:

The applicant is granted bail pending appeal. In addition to the standard conditions contained in the proposed undertaking to be offered by Mr Fuller, order the further conditions that Mr Fuller reside at (withheld). Further order that that residential condition may be changed with the written consent of an officer of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – BAIL – BAIL
PENDING APPEAL – where applicant convicted of public nuisance on his guilty plea and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment with parole release after 2 months – where applicant applied for bail pending appeal – where prospects on appeal reasonable but not determined to be strong – where the applicant would have served all or a significant part of the custodial component of his sentence by the time the appeal was disposed of – whether appropriate to grant bail pending appeal

R v Fuller [2008] QCA 303.

Hanson v DPP [2003] QCA 409.

ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303

United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 183 ALR 645

COUNSEL:

Sibley of counsel with MacAdam of counsel for the applicant

Ms P Price of counsel for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Office of Director of Public Prosecutions for respondent

HIS HONOUR: I have before me an application for bail pending the hearing of an appeal against sentence. The sentence was imposed on about 28th of April 2010 when the applicant was sentenced to six month's imprisonment with a parole release date of 28 June 2010.

The earliest that an Appeal Court might hear an appeal in this matter, unless special arrangements were made, has been advised to me by Ms Price for the respondent to be late May 2010. In the circumstances it seems that at least one half of the custodial sentence would be served before the appeal was heard.

The Court hearing an application for bail has a discretion. There are authorities which assist Judges determining bail applications, and I have this morning been referred to R v Fuller [2008] QCA 303, and Hanson v DPP (Qld) [2003] QCA 409, each of which is a case where applications for bail were sought and considered after conviction. Unlike the case before me, they were neither of them cases of a particularly short sentence. Each of them followed and applied ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303.

I have not been given a copy of that case this morning, but did recently read it and accept that it does show that in applications for bail like the one which occurred in that case, the discretion should take into account the fact that where there are long terms imposed to…

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 Re Luke Adam Fuller

Details

AGLC: Re Luke Adam Fuller [2010] QDC 210
Case: [2010] QDC 210
Decision Date: 12 May 2010 ex tempore

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Re Luke Adam Fuller, the applicant sought bail pending appeal against his conviction and sentence. Fuller was convicted of public nuisance after entering a guilty plea and was sentenced to six months imprisonment with parole release after two months. Fuller applied for bail pending appeal, which was opposed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The court had to determine whether bail should be granted to Fuller pending the outcome of his appeal.

The central issue before the court was whether it was appropriate to grant bail to Fuller pending appeal, given that his appeal prospects were reasonable but not strong, and he would have served all or a significant part of his custodial sentence by the time the appeal was disposed of. The court considered the relevant legislative framework, case law, and the circumstances of the case, including Fuller's criminal history and the nature of the offence.

The court held that it was appropriate to grant bail pending appeal. The court found that Fuller had a reasonable prospect of success on appeal, and that the appeal was not a mere formality. While the appeal was not determined to be strong, the court considered that the appeal had merit and that Fuller should not be required to serve his entire custodial sentence before the appeal was determined. The court also noted that Fuller had complied with his sentence and had not reoffended while on bail pending sentence. Accordingly, the court granted Fuller bail pending appeal, with additional conditions relating to his residence.

The court further ordered that Fuller reside at a specified address, with the condition that any change to this address must be approved in writing by an officer of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The court also ordered that Fuller be subject to the standard conditions of bail, as well as any additional conditions proposed by the prosecution and accepted by Fuller.

Orders

Orders of the court

The applicant is granted bail pending appeal. In addition to the standard conditions contained in the proposed undertaking to be offered by Mr Fuller, order the further conditions that Mr Fuller reside at (withheld). Further order that that residential condition may be changed with the written consent of an officer of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

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:	Re Luke Adam Fuller [2010] QDC 210
PARTIES:	LUKE ADAM FULLER
FILE NO/S:	No 1392 of 2010
DIVISION:	Applications
PROCEEDING:	Bail Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court
DELIVERED ON:	12 May 2010 ex tempore
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	12 May 2010
JUDGE:	Andrews DCJ
ORDER:	The applicant is granted bail pending appeal. In addition to the standard conditions contained in the proposed undertaking to be offered by Mr Fuller, order the further conditions that Mr Fuller reside at (withheld). Further order that that residential condition may be changed with the written consent of an officer of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – BAIL – BAIL PENDING APPEAL – where applicant convicted of public nuisance on his guilty plea and sentenced to 6 months imprisonment with parole release after 2 months – where applicant applied for bail pending appeal – where prospects on appeal reasonable but not determined to be strong – where the applicant would have served all or a significant part of the custodial component of his sentence by the time the appeal was disposed of – whether appropriate to grant bail pending appeal R v Fuller [2008] QCA 303. Hanson v DPP [2003] QCA 409. ex parte Maher [1986] 1 Qd R 303 United Mexican States v Cabal (2001) 183 ALR 645
COUNSEL:	Sibley of counsel with MacAdam of counsel for the applicant Ms P Price of counsel for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Office of Director of Public Prosecutions for respondent