REGINA v. BREHOI [1999] NSWCCA 113

REGINA v. BREHOI [1999] NSWCCA 113

The extension of time was refused because the applicant had pleaded guilty while represented, the relevant complaints had already been substantially canvassed on the sentence appeal, no error was shown or indicated in the voir dire ruling, the Victims Compensation Tribunal material did not create any common issue giving rise to inadmissibility, no basis was shown to overturn the pleas, and no adequate explanation was provided for the nearly four-year delay.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
['extension of Time to Appeal' 'conviction Appeal After Guilty Plea' 'admissibility of Erisp' 'voir Dire' 'integrity of Guilty Plea']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'appeals'] ['extension of Time to Appeal' 'conviction Appeal After Guilty Plea' 'admissibility of Erisp' 'voir Dire' 'integrity of Guilty Plea']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal against convictions entered on guilty pleas in 1995.' 'Whether any arguable basis was shown to challenge the voir dire ruling admitting the ERISP.' "Whether the applicant's guilty pleas could be impugned because they were not attributable to a genuine consciousness of guilt or because there was a real question to be tried." 'Whether the delay in bringing the conviction appeal was adequately explained.']

Ratio Decidendi

The extension of time was refused because the applicant had pleaded guilty while represented, the relevant complaints had already been substantially canvassed on the sentence appeal, no error was shown or indicated in the voir dire ruling, the Victims Compensation Tribunal material did not create any common issue giving rise to inadmissibility, no basis was shown to overturn the pleas, and no adequate explanation was provided for the nearly four-year delay.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused.

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time within which the appellant may appeal against his conviction is refused.']