Terry Patrick Sharples v Director Of Public Prosecutions

[2012] HCASL 138

TERRY PATRICK SHARPLES

v

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

[2012] HCASL 138
B68/2011

1. On 19 August 2002, the applicant was convicted of contempt of court under s 40(1)(c) of the Justices Act 1886 (Q). The applicant had been present in in the Magistrates Court of Queensland during committal proceedings against Ms Pauline Hanson and Mr David Ettridge. In the course of the examination of a witness, the applicant had looked directly at the witness and uttered the following words: "Oh, he'll die - he'll die for that one." Magistrate Halliday found that the applicant had wilfully interrupted the examination of the witness. The applicant was fined $150 and a conviction was recorded.

2. On 28 March 2011, the District Court of Queensland (Andrews DCJ) heard applications by the applicant for leave to adduce further evidence and for an extension of time in which to file an amended notice of appeal.  Andrews DCJ refused both applications.  His Honour found that the applicant's delay in seeking to bring the appeal more than eight years after the conviction was extreme and without satisfactory explanation.  His Honour also found that, even if an extension were to be granted and additional evidence adduced, the applicant would have poor prospects of succeeding on the appeal.

3. On 23 September 2011, the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Queensland unanimously refused the applicant's application for an extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against Andrews DCJ's decision.  McMurdo P (with whom White JA and Philippides J agreed) held that Andrews DCJ had been plainly right to conclude that the applicant's delay was extraordinary and unexplained.  Her Honour found that, on the material before the Court, any application for leave to appeal would not succeed.  Philippides J (with whom White JA agreed) observed that to grant the applicant an extension of time would tend to erode confidence in the administration of justice.

4. The applicant requires an extension of time in which to file his application for special leave to appeal to this Court.  That extension should not be granted.  There is no reason to doubt the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.  The interests of the proper administration of justice would not be served by the grant of an extension of time or special leave to appeal.

5. Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application.

W.M.C. Gummow
15 August 2012 S.M. Kiefel