Col v R [2022] NSWCCA 279

Col v R [2022] NSWCCA 279

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant gave no satisfactory explanation for filing the appeal out of time and none of the proposed grounds had merit. Any error about the applicant having been through the Drug Court program was not of real substance and caused no miscarriage of justice given his long drug-related recidivism and failure to address his drug issues. The alleged remorse material and testimonials did not demonstrate a miscarriage of justice, and the reconstructed remorse evidence did not amount to remorse under s 21A(3)(i). The COVID-19 custody material was either new evidence available before sentence whose absence caused no miscarriage of justice, or inadmissible...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'dishonestly Obtain Property by Deception' 'supply Prohibited Drugs on Ongoing Basis' 'supply Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'knowingly Deal With Proceeds of Crime' 'new Evidence and Fresh Evidence on Sentence Appeal' 'drug Court Program' 'remorse' 'covid 19 Custody Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time' 'dishonestly Obtain Property by Deception' 'supply Prohibited Drugs on Ongoing Basis' 'supply Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'knowingly Deal With Proceeds of Crime' 'new Evidence and Fresh Evidence on Sentence Appeal' 'drug Court Program' 'remorse' 'covid 19 Custody Conditions']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted where no satisfactory explanation for delay was given.' "Whether the sentencing judge's finding that the applicant had been through the Drug Court program caused a miscarriage of justice." 'Whether alleged failure by counsel to tender a letter of remorse and character references caused a miscarriage of justice.' 'Whether evidence about COVID-19 restrictions in custody was admissible or showed a miscarriage of justice.' 'Whether any ground of appeal had merit.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant gave no satisfactory explanation for filing the appeal out of time and none of the proposed grounds had merit. Any error about the applicant having been through the Drug Court program was not of real substance and caused no miscarriage of justice given his long drug-related recidivism and failure to address his drug issues. The alleged remorse material and testimonials did not demonstrate a miscarriage of justice, and the reconstructed remorse evidence did not amount to remorse under s 21A(3)(i). The COVID-19 custody material was either new evidence available before sentence whose absence caused no miscarriage of justice, or inadmissible...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Refuse leave to appeal.']