Stevens v The Queen

[2018] ACTCA 7

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL

Case Title:

Stevens v The Queen

Citation:

[2018] ACTCA 7

Hearing Date:

21 February 2018

DecisionDate:

21 February 2018

Before:

Murrell CJ, Burns and Bromwich JJ

Decision:

The appellant is refused leave to appeal on ground (b).

The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

Catchwords:

APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – Appeal against conviction – whether verdict is unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence

APPEAL – GENERAL PRINCIPLES – Directions to the Jury – Appeal from conviction – Application under r 5531 of the Courts Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT)

Legislation Cited:

Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1991 (ACT) ss 72, 73

Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT) r 5531

Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) r 4

Cases Cited:

Cruz v R [2017] ACTCA 48

Libke v The Queen [2007] HCA 30; 230 CLR 559
M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487
Munro v The Queen [2014] ACTCA 11

Wyper v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 59

Parties:

Craig Joseph Stevens (Appellant)

The Queen (Respondent)

Representation:

Counsel

Mr R Livingstone  (Appellant)

Ms M Jones  (Respondent)

Solicitors

Legal Aid ACT (Appellant)

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number:

ACTCA 32 of 2017

Decision under appeal: 

Court/Tribunal:             Supreme Court of the ACT

Before:  Mossop J

Date of Decision:         3 March 2017

Case Title:  R v Stevens

Court File Number:       SCC 69 of 2016

MURRELL CJ:

1. For the reasons given by Bromwich J, I consider that the application for leave to raise ground (b) should be refused, that ground (a) must fail and that the appeal should be dismissed.

I certify that the preceding one [1] numbered paragraph is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of her Honour Chief Justice Murrell.

Associate:

Date: 15 March 2018

BURNS J:

1. I agree with the reasons given by Bromwich J and with the orders proposed by his Honour and the Chief Justice.

I certify that the preceding one [1] numbered paragraph are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Justice Burns.

Associate:

Date: 15 March 2018

BROMWICH J:

1. On 3 March 2017, the appellant was found guilty by a jury of four counts of sexual intercourse without consent.  The conduct upon which the convictions were based occurred on three separate days in May and June 2015. 

1. On 24 July 2017, the appellant was sentenced to a total of five years and eight months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of three years and four months’ imprisonment set to commence on 13 January 2017. 

1. The appellant appealed against all four convictions, advancing two grounds of appeal.  Ground (a) was that the verdict on count 2 was unreasonable having regard to the evidence.  Ground (b) was that, in relation to count 1 and, collaterally, counts 2, 3 and 4, the trial judge had failed to give the jury an adequate direction about recklessness as to lack of consent. 

1. The appellant abandoned a claim that the sentences were manifestly excessive.

1. As to the…