Citation: R v Mahe [2000] NSWCCA 263
Court: New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Date: 12 July 2000
Judge(s): James J; Bell J
Background
The applicant, an unrepresented prisoner, sought leave to appeal against sentences imposed by Acting Judge Ford QC in the District Court on 11 December 1998. Legal Aid had been refused, meaning the applicant was self-represented throughout the proceedings.
When the matter was called on for hearing, the applicant applied for an adjournment on the basis that he was not ready to proceed. The Crown's written submissions in response to the leave application had only been transmitted by facsimile to the correctional centre where the applicant was held the previous night.
Legal Issues
- Whether the Court should grant an adjournment of the application for leave to appeal against sentence, where the applicant was unrepresented and had received the Crown's submissions only the night before the scheduled hearing.
Decision
James J, with Bell J, noted that the Crown did not oppose the adjournment application. The Court accepted that the circumstances justified a delay, given the very late receipt of the Crown's submissions and the applicant's unrepresented status.
The Court granted the adjournment, though James J was careful to inform the applicant that no assurance could be given as to when the matter would next be heard. The application was stood out of the day's list and referred to the next available Court of Criminal Appeal callover for the purpose of fixing a new hearing date.
Orders Made
- Application for adjournment granted.
- Matter stood out of the current list and placed in the next available Court of Criminal Appeal callover list to fix a fresh hearing date for the application for leave to appeal against sentence.
Key Takeaways
- The Court of Criminal Appeal granted an adjournment where Crown submissions were provided to an unrepresented applicant only the night before the scheduled hearing, finding that proceeding in those circumstances would be unfair.
- An unrepresented applicant's inability to prepare adequate submissions in response to late-served Crown material was treated as sufficient grounds to adjourn a leave to appeal application.
- Granting the adjournment did not carry any guarantee as to timing; the Court expressly indicated it could not say when the application would next be listed.
- This decision is purely procedural and establishes no substantive legal principle beyond confirming that basic procedural fairness considerations apply to unrepresented appellants in the Court of Criminal Appeal.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
No legislation or cases were cited in the judgment.