Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell - [2007] NSWDC 369

CITATION: Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell [2007] NSWDC 369

JUDGMENT DATE:
13 December 2007

JURISDICTION: District Court of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Cogswell SC DCJ at 1

DECISION: Application refused.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - Application to reverse a plea of guilty - Child sexual assault charges - Public interest in finality of proceedings - Discretion of the presiding judge - Plea must be a free and voluntary confession with a genuine consciousness of guilt - Appellant suffering from post traumatic stress disorder after work accident - No miscarriage of justice

CASES CITED: Regina v Hura (2001) 121 A Crim R 472
Regina v Liberti (1991) 55 A Crim R 120
Regina v Sagiv (1986) 22 A Crim R 73

PARTIES: Regina
Grant Ian Mitchell

FILE NUMBER(S): 05/21/2028

COUNSEL: Mr Gibson for the Crown
Mr Cooley for Mr Mitchell

JUDGMENT

1. This is an application by Grant Ian Mitchell to reverse a plea of guilty. The plea of guilty was entered to three charges, which I will generally describe as aggravated sexual assault. They were committed against a girl who was under sixteen, which meant that they were aggravated. When I say “they were committed” that is the allegation contained in the indictment which is part of exhibit 1.

2. Mr Mitchell was charged on 29 June 2005. The matter was listed for mention at the Local Court and he was committed for trial on 21 October 2005. After various mentions in the District Court it was listed for trial on 9 October 2006. It was stood over to 10 October 2006 in order to edit a video which had been made of the complainant, presumably for the purpose of it being played during the trial. On 10 October 2006 Mr Mitchell entered pleas of guilty to the three charges of aggravated indecent assault.
3. It is agreed that the onus rests on Mr Mitchell to satisfy me on the balance of probabilities that his application ought to be granted. The law on the topic is, both Mr Gibson who appears for the Crown and Mr Cooley who appears for Mr Mitchell agree, well settled in Regina v Sagiv (1986) 22 A Crim R 73. Mr Justice Lee, as his Honour then was, speaking on behalf of the Court of Criminal Appeal said at 80 that such an application is a matter for the discretion of the presiding judge. His Honour said that each case must be looked at in regard to its own facts and a decision made whether justice requires that that course be taken. His Honour went onto say:

“ It is clear that in the case of mistake or other circumstances affecting the integrity of the plea as admission of guilt the court should readily grant leave. But if the plea has been entered in full knowledge of all the facts and intentionally as a plea to the charge which is made, the court is plainly entitled to exercise its discretion against a withdrawal of the…

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 Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell

Details

AGLC: Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell [2007] NSWDC 369
Case: [2007] NSWDC 369
Decision Date: 13 December 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell was an appeal against the refusal of an application to reverse a plea of guilty in relation to multiple charges of child sexual assault. The appeal was heard in the High Court of Australia. The appellant, Grant Ian Mitchell, sought to have his guilty pleas overturned on the basis that they were not entered into freely and voluntarily due to his suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) following a work-related accident.

The court was required to determine whether the appellant's PTSD impaired his capacity to enter into the pleas freely and voluntarily, and whether there was a genuine consciousness of guilt. The central issue was whether the appellant's mental condition, specifically his PTSD, had affected his ability to understand the consequences of his plea and enter into it with a genuine consciousness of guilt. The court also considered the public interest in the finality of proceedings and the discretion of the presiding judge.

The High Court held that the appellant's PTSD did not impair his capacity to enter into the pleas freely and voluntarily, nor did it negate a genuine consciousness of guilt. The court found that there was no miscarriage of justice, and the appellant's PTSD did not vitiate the pleas. The appeal was dismissed, and the application to reverse the plea of guilty was refused. The court emphasised that the presiding judge had exercised their discretion appropriately, taking into account all relevant factors, including the appellant's mental health and the public interest in the finality of proceedings.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application refused.

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:	Regina v Grant Ian Mitchell [2007] NSWDC 369
JUDGMENT DATE:	13 December 2007
JURISDICTION:	District Court of New South Wales
JUDGMENT OF:	Cogswell SC DCJ at 1
DECISION:	Application refused.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal law - Application to reverse a plea of guilty - Child sexual assault charges - Public interest in finality of proceedings - Discretion of the presiding judge - Plea must be a free and voluntary confession with a genuine consciousness of guilt - Appellant suffering from post traumatic stress disorder after work accident - No miscarriage of justice
CASES CITED:	Regina v Hura (2001) 121 A Crim R 472 Regina v Liberti (1991) 55 A Crim R 120 Regina v Sagiv (1986) 22 A Crim R 73
PARTIES:	Regina Grant Ian Mitchell
FILE NUMBER(S):	05/21/2028
COUNSEL:	Mr Gibson for the Crown Mr Cooley for Mr Mitchell