Wright v McMurchy

The case of Wright v McMurchy involved an appeal against a conviction following a plea of guilty. The appellant, Wright, challenged his conviction on two grounds. Firstly, he argued that the indecent act offence was not committed in a public or public place, specifically contending that a taxi did not constitute a public place. Secondly, Wright appealed against his conviction for possession of a controlled weapon, arguing that the appeal notice was filed 11 months outside the time prescribed for appealing. Additionally, he sought a spent conviction order.

The court was tasked with determining whether the appeal could be entertained given the late filing of the appeal notice and whether the taxi could be considered a public place for the purposes of the indecent act offence. The court also had to decide if the appellant's late filing of the appeal notice constituted a ground for appeal and whether a spent conviction order was appropriate. The primary focus was on whether the appellant could demonstrate that a miscarriage of justice had occurred, given his plea of guilty.

The court found that the appeal against the indecent act offence was not valid because the taxi could reasonably be considered a public place. It held that statutory provisions conferring appellate power are to be exercised for the correction of error or curing miscarriages of justice, but the power is contingent upon demonstrating such error or miscarriage. The court also found that the late filing of the appeal notice did not constitute a ground for appeal, as the appellant failed to demonstrate that the additional evidence would have produced a different result if it had been available at the trial. The court further determined that a spent conviction order was not appropriate in the circumstances of this case.

The final orders of the court were that the appeal against the conviction for the indecent act offence was dismissed, the appeal against the conviction for possession of a controlled weapon was dismissed due to the late filing of the notice of appeal, and the application for a spent conviction order was dismissed.