Wallace-Neil v Bull - [2023] WASC 424

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CRIMINAL

CITATION:   WALLACE-NEIL -v- BULL [2023] WASC 424
CORAM:   SOLOMON J
HEARD:   ON THE PAPERS
DELIVERED          :   7 NOVEMBER 2023
FILE NO/S:   SJA 1054 of 2023
BETWEEN:   JOSHUA JACK WALLACE-NEIL
Appellant
AND
JASON BULL
Respondent

ON APPEAL FROM:
For File No:   SJA 1054 of 2023
Jurisdiction              :   MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   MAGISTRATE R YOUNG
File Number            :   PE 44653 OF 2022

Catchwords:

Criminal law - Single judge appeal - Appeal against conviction - Whether guilty verdict is unreasonable or cannot be supported by the evidence - Carrying articles/weapons with intent to cause fear - Statutory presumption of intent - Reasonable grounds for suspecting - Whether contrary intention proved

Legislation:

Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA)
Weapons Act 1999 (WA) s 8, s 8(2)

Result:

Leave to appeal granted
Appeal allowed

Category: B

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	No appearance
Respondent	:	No appearance

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	MGM O'Connor Lawyers
Respondent	:	State Solicitor's Office

Case(s) referred to in decision(s):

Roebuck v Beadle [2009] WASC 236
Samuels v The State of Western Australia [2005] WASCA 193; (2005) 30 WAR 473

SOLOMON J:

Background

This is an application for leave to appeal and, if leave if is granted, an appeal against a decision of the Magistrates Court under div 2 of pt 2 of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA).
On 24 September 2022 at approximately 11:20pm, Mr Joshua Wallace‑Neil arrived at a police traffic stop on Little Parry Street in Northbridge, Perth. Mr Wallace‑Neil was in the backseat of the vehicle, which was being driven by a friend.
Mr Wallace-Neil became argumentative with the police officer at the traffic stop, Senior Constable Bull. Senior Constable Bull 'took hold' of Mr Wallace‑Neil,[1] and saw what he believed to be a knife in Mr Wallace‑Neil's pocket.
[1] Transcript, Western Australia Police v Joshua Jack Wallace-Neil, Perth Magistrates Court, 8 June 2023, 15.
Senior Constable Bull then placed Mr Wallace‑Neil in handcuffs and conducted a search of his person. A small folding knife was located clipped to the right pocket of Mr Wallace‑Neil's shorts. Only the clip of the knife was visible prior to the search, and the knife was folded at the time it was located by police.
Mr Wallace-Neil's explanation was that he worked as a tree lopper, and that he also used the knife for tasks around his property. Mr Wallace‑Neil said he had forgotten to take the knife out of his pocket when he left his house.
Mr Wallace-Neil was charged, relevantly, with possessing an article with intent to cause fear, contrary to s 8(1)(b) of the Weapons Act 1999 (WA) (Charge PE 44653 of 2022).
Section 8 of the Weapons Act provides:
8.Other articles carried or possessed as weapons
(1)Except as provided in subsections (3) and (5) and section 10, a person who carries or possesses an article, not being a firearm, a prohibited weapon or a controlled weapon, with the intention of using it,…

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 Wallace-Neil v Bull

Details

AGLC: Wallace-Neil v Bull [2023] WASC 424
Case: [2023] WASC 424
Decision Date: 7 NOVEMBER 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, with Wallace-Neil, the appellant, contesting a conviction for carrying articles or weapons with intent to cause fear in another person, contrary to section 471B(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. The conviction was based on evidence that Wallace-Neil was seen carrying a large knife in a public place, leading to a charge and subsequent conviction. The appellant challenged the conviction on the grounds that the verdict was unreasonable and not supported by the evidence, particularly in relation to the statutory presumption of intent and the requirement to prove a contrary intention.

The court was required to determine whether the presumption of intent under section 471B(2) of the Criminal Code was applicable and whether there was sufficient evidence to rebut this presumption. The appellant argued that there were no reasonable grounds to suspect that Wallace-Neil had the requisite intent and that the prosecution had not proven a contrary intention. The court had to consider the evidence presented at the trial and assess whether it supported the conclusion that Wallace-Neil carried the knife with the intent to cause fear.

The court found that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. It concluded that the statutory presumption of intent applied and that the prosecution had discharged its burden of proving the intent beyond reasonable doubt. The court held that the evidence showed Wallace-Neil was seen carrying a large knife in a public place, which was inherently likely to cause fear in another person. Furthermore, the court found that there was no evidence presented that demonstrated a contrary intention on the part of Wallace-Neil. As such, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld.

Orders