R v McKinlay
[2012] QCA 86
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 McKinlay[2012] QCA 86
- Add to List
R v McKinlay[2012] QCA 86
R v McKinlay[2012] QCA 86
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
PARTIES: | |
FILE NO/S: | MC No 15866 of 2009 |
Court of Appeal | |
PROCEEDING: | Application for Extension (Conviction & Sentence) |
ORIGINATING COURT: | |
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON: | 12 April 2012 |
DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
HEARING DATE: | 12 April 2012 |
JUDGES: | Muir and White JJA and Mullins J Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made |
ORDERS: | The application for an extension of time be refused |
CATCHWORDS: | APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – TIME FOR APPEAL – EXTENSION OF TIME – GENERAL PRINCIPLES AS TO GRANT OR REFUSAL – where applicant convicted on guilty plea in Magistrates Court of serious assault – where applicant had applied for an extension of time in which to appeal to Court of Appeal – where application was refused on the basis the court had no jurisdiction – where applicant sought an extension of time to file a second appeal against conviction and sentence – whether the court had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from the Magistrates Court McKinlay v Commissioner of Police [2011] QCA 356 , followed |
COUNSEL: | The applicant appeared on his own behalf D L Meredith for the respondent |
SOLICITORS: | The applicant appeared on his own behalf Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent |
MULLINS J: The applicant, Mr McKinlay, applies to the Court of Appeal for an extension of time in which to appeal his conviction and sentence before the Magistrates Court at Southport on 7 February 2011 for serious assault.
This is the second time that Mr McKinlay has made an application to this Court for an extension of time in which to appeal against conviction. The last application was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 9 December 2011: McKinlay v Commissioner of Police [2011] QCA 356.
Those reasons set out the history of the offending, the charging of Mr McKinlay with the offence, the proceeding in the Magistrates Court where the offence was dealt with summarily on Mr McKinlay's plea of guilty, and Mr McKinlay's two unsuccessful applications to the District Court for extension of time in which to appeal.
One of Mr McKinlay's complaints at the last hearing before the Court of Appeal was that he had never received from the police the witness statements and the tape of his record of interview before he was dealt with for the offence in the Magistrates Court. Prior to the current application Mr McKinlay received from the police a tape of his record of interview. His grounds of appeal are now based on the content of the record of interview and the failure of the police to provide him with the record of interview before he pleaded guilty.
The receipt by Mr McKinlay of his tape-recorded interview does not alter the position that was set out in McKinlay v Commissioner of Police [2011] QCA 356 at [16]. This Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from Mr McKinlay's conviction or sentence in the Magistrates Court. There is no point in granting an extension of time for Mr McKinlay to appeal. The application for extension of time should be refused.
MUIR JA: I agree.
WHITE JA: I agree also.
MUIR JA: The order of the Court is that the application for an extension of time be refused.