R v Lumley
[2009] QCA 172
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 - Special Leave Refused (HCA)
- R v Lumley[2009] QCA 172
- Add to List
R v Lumley[2009] QCA 172
R v Lumley[2009] QCA 172
COURT OF APPEAL
de JERSEY CJ
KEANE JA
FRASER JA
CA No 44 of 2009
DC No 324 of 2002
THE QUEEN
v
CHRISTOPHER EDMONSTONE FERNEAUX LUMLEYApplicant
DATE 17/06/2009
JUDGMENT
KEANE JA: On 5 March 2003 the applicant was convicted upon the verdict of a jury of one count of rape and one count of torture. On 4 April 2003 he was sentenced to eight years' imprisonment and the offences were declared to be serious, violent offences under section 161B(3) of the Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld). The applicant appealed to this Court in respect of his conviction and sentence.
On 23 April 2004 this Court dismissed the appeal against conviction but upheld his appeal against sentence to the extent of omitting the declaration that the offences were serious, violent offences. See R v Lumley [2004] QCA 120.
On 9 March 2009 the applicant filed an application for an extension of time within which to appeal against his conviction. The applicant wishes to assert that because he was a police informant the case against him was fabricated by "members of an exceedingly dangerous armed police drug cartel".
The right of appeal to this Court from a conviction following the verdict of a jury is conferred by section 668D of the Criminal Code. It is well established by a series of decisions that where that right has been exercised and a decision on the appeal has been given on the merits the right conferred by section 668D is exhausted and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a further appeal. See Grierson v The Queen (1938) 60 CLR 431; Posteleonie v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; R v MAM [2005] QCA 323 at 3-4; R v Nudd [2007] QCA 40; R v Ali [2008] QCA 39 and R v Lumley [2008] QCA 155.
Today Mr Lumley sought to rely upon the provisions of section 58 of the Constitution of Queensland 2001 as conferring a more ample jurisdiction on this Court. The possibility that section 58 confers jurisdiction on this Court additional to that conferred by the specific provisions of section 668D of the Criminal Code was rejected by this Court in R v Ali [2008] QCA 39 at pages 2-3. The High Court of Australia refused special leave to appeal in that case.
Since this court has no jurisdiction to entertain a further appeal by the applicant against his conviction the grant of extension of time within which to appeal would be futile.
Accordingly, I would dismiss the application for an extension of time.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: I agree.
FRASER JA: I agree.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE: The application is dismissed.