Regina v Stolpe [2000] NSWCCA 359

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Stolpe [2000] NSWCCA 359 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60470/97 HEARING DATE(S) : 06/09/00 JUDGMENT DATE : 6 September 2000

PARTIES : Owen Stolpe (Appellant) Regina (Respondent) JUDGMENT OF : Fitzgerald JA at 1; Newman J at 8; Hulme J at 9

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 95/21/0497 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Graham DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : O Stolpe (In Person) - (Appellant) P G Berman (Crown) SOLICITORS : O Stolpe (In Person) (Appellant) S E O'Connor (Crown)

DECISION : Application dismissed

THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CCA 60470/97 DC 95/21/0497 FITZGERALD JA NEWMAN J HULME J

WEDNESDAY 6 SEPTEMBER 2000

REGINA v STOLPE

JUDGMENT

1 FITZGERALD JA: The appellant, who is now sixty one years of age, was tried by Graham DCJ on 18 September 1997 for nine counts of obtain money by deception contrary to s 178(8)BA of the Crimes Act 1900, and in the alternative, nine counts of make false statement pursuant to s 178BB of the Act. 2 The appellant was convicted of the nine counts of obtain money by deception, each of which carried a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment and was sentenced on each count to a concurrent sentence of nine months imprisonment to commence on 19 September 1997 and expire on 18 June 1998. 3 The appellant subsequently appealed in relation to both the convictions and sentences. He remained in custody after he was sentenced until 12 May 1998 after which bail was granted. He has spent a total of six months and four days in custody so that part of his sentence of imprisonment has not yet been served. 4 It is unnecessary to discuss the facts in any detail. Each of the offences of which the appellant was convicted concerned statements which he made to Mr Keith Guthrey who was at the time his neighbour at Erina and money which was obtained from Mr Guthrey, both the statements and the money relating to development projects in which the appellant invited Mr Guthrey to participate. 5 The appellant, on about 9 April 1999, filed twenty grounds of appeal in relation to his conviction and an additional four grounds of appeal in relation to sentence, (although wrongly headed in the document, Appeal Against Conviction). The material document is to be found in vol 1 of the appeal record at pp 5 and 6. 6 Between the commencement of his appeal and the hearing this morning the appellant also filed many other documents, by no means all of which are readily comprehensible. However in the proceeding before the Court this morning the appellant went, at the Court's invitation, to each of his grounds of appeal in order and indicated what was the subject matter of his complaint under each ground. Discussion ensued in relation to some grounds more than others but in each case the point which the appellant sought to raise was clearly elucidated. His statements and references in the transcript to the matters to which the grounds of appeal relate and where appropriate the Court's responses will appear in the record which is being made of this proceeding. 7 I am satisfied that none of the grounds of appeal provides even a faintly arguable basis for this Court's intervention with either the appellant's convictions or the sentences imposed upon the appellant. Each and every one of the grounds is, in my view, entirely without merit. It would be otiose to say more since it would involve an attempt to reject by argument that which is unarguable. 8 NEWMAN J: I agree. 9 HULME J: I also agree. 10 FITZGERALD JA: The appellant's bail has expired upon his answering it by his attendance before the Court this morning. He must now return to custody. 11 APPELLANT: Your Honour, can I apply for resentencing, application for resentencing on compassionate grounds. 12 FITZGERALD JA: In case it was not made clear Mr Stolpe, both the appeal against your convictions and your application for leave to appeal against your sentences are dismissed. 13 APPELLANT: Could your Honour confirm my sentencing? 14 NEWMAN J: I agree. 15 HULME J: There is no need for anything more to be said Mr Stolpe. 16 FITZGERALD JA: Newman J has indicated his agreement with the orders I propose. 17 HULME J: So do I. 18 FITZGERALD JA: As has Hulme J. Accordingly you must return to custody Mr Stolpe. **********

DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated.