R v Regazzoli
[2001] QCA 482
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Determined (QCA)
- R v Regazzoli[2001] QCA 482
- Add to List
R v Regazzoli[2001] QCA 482
R v Regazzoli[2001] QCA 482
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: | R v Regazzoli [2001] QCA 482 |
PARTIES: | R v REGAZZOLI, Anthony (applicant) |
FILE NO/S: | CA No 223 of 2001 SC No 98 of 1999 |
DIVISION: | Court of Appeal |
PROCEEDING: | Application for Extension (Conviction) |
ORIGINATING COURT: | Supreme Court at Brisbane |
DELIVERED ON: | 9 November 2001 |
DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
HEARING DATE: | 17 October 2001 |
JUDGES: | Davies JA, Ambrose and Cullinane JJ Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made |
ORDER: | Application refused |
CATCHWORDS: | APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – where the court previously refused appeal against conviction – where applicant seeks extension of time for appeal against same conviction on ground that new witness provides alibi – whether court has jurisdiction to further entertain matter Criminal Code (Qld) s 672A R v Alexanderson, McQueen, Barlow and Farr [2001] QCA 400; CA Nos 155, 156 196 and 197, 24 September 2001, considered R v Grierson (1938) 60 CLR 431, referred to R v Regazzoli [2000] QCA 326; CA No 124, 15 August 2000, referred to |
COUNSEL: | The applicant appeared on his own behalf SG Bain for the respondent |
SOLICITORS: | The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent |
- DAVIES JA: I agree with the reasons for judgment of Cullinane J and the order he proposes.
- AMBROSE J: I agree with Cullinane J.
- CULLINANE J: The applicant seeks an extension of time within which to appeal against his conviction on two counts of producing a dangerous drug, cannabis sativa. He was convicted after trial in the Supreme Court at Brisbane on 4th April 2000 and sentenced to imprisonment for five years on each count. His application was filed on the 28th August 2001.
- In his application for an extension of time and in the notice of appeal, a single ground is advanced. It is to the effect that there is available evidence from a witness (one Eyears, who has provided a statutory declaration) who provides an alibi for him at the time a police officer said in evidence that he saw the applicant at the scene of one of the plantations which form the subject of the charges. The applicant says that he did not previously recall his whereabouts at this time.
- It is not necessary to discuss in any further detail the circumstances of the offences or the evidence linking the applicant to the plantations or the alibi evidence upon which he relies. This is because, it seems to me, the applicant faces an insurmountable obstacle, so far as his application to extend the time in which to appeal against conviction is concerned.
- Following his conviction in April 2000 the applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal against conviction. This appeal was dismissed on the 15th August 2000 (see R v Regazzoli [2000] QCA 326; CA No 124, 15 August 2000).
- The applicant is therefore in the position where he has already exercised his rights of appeal against conviction. Having done so, those rights are exhausted and he may not pursue a second appeal against conviction (see R v Grierson (1938) 60 CLR 431).
- The issue was considered recently by the Court of Appeal in R v Alexanderson, McQueen, Barlow and Farr [2001] QCA 400; CA Nos 155, 156 196 and 197, 24 September 2001.
- In the course of his judgment, Williams JA (with whom the other members of the court agreed) after reviewing the various authorities on the subject, said at page 8:
“The Court’s appellate jurisdiction is determined by the various statutes which confer such jurisdiction on it. Section 668 of the Code confers on a convicted person a right of appeal and once that appeal is exhausted then, except where section 672A may apply, this court has no jurisdiction to further entertain the matter".
- It seems to me that the only possible avenues open to the applicant are to petition the Governor pursuant to s 672A of the Criminal Code or to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court from the dismissal on 15th August 2000 of the applicant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal.
- I would refuse the application.