JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
TITLE OF COURT : THE COURT OF APPEAL (WA)
CITATION: SANTOS -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA [No 3] [2013] WASCA 40
CORAM: McLURE P
BUSS JA
NEWNES JA
HEARD: 12 OCTOBER 2012
DELIVERED : 20 FEBRUARY 2013
FILE NO/S: CACR 24 of 2012
BETWEEN: JAMIESON ANDREW SANTOS
Appellant
AND
THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram :STEVENSON DCJ
File No :IND 1616 of 2008
Catchwords:
Criminal law and procedure - Review of decision refusing application for bail pending appeal and adjourning application for appointment of a special commissioner - Turns on own facts
Legislation:
Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 40(1)(f)
Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA), pt 2 div 3
Result:
Review dismissed
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant: In person
Respondent: Mr L M Fox
Solicitors:
Appellant: In person
Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions (WA)
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
McLURE P: This is a review under pt 2 div 3 of the Supreme Court (Court of Appeal) Rules 2005 (WA) of the decisions of Mazza JA refusing the appellant's application for bail pending appeal and adjourning his application for the appointment of a special commissioner under s 40(1)(f) of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA): Santos v The State of Western Australia [2012] WASCA 144.
The decision of Mazza JA on each application is correct for the reasons he gives. Moreover, the court has now heard and determined the appellant's application for leave to appeal against conviction. It has concluded that none of the appellant's grounds of appeal have a reasonable prospect of succeeding, with the consequence that the appeal is dismissed: Santos v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 39. Accordingly, the appellant's application for the appointment of a special commissioner to inquire into and report on a question in the appeal must also be dismissed.
Thus the orders will be that the review be dismissed and the appellant's application for the appointment of an examiner or special commissioner also be dismissed.
BUSS JA: I agree with McLure P.
NEWNES JA: I agree with McLure P.
- AGLC
- Santos v The State of Western Australia [No 3] [2013] WASCA 40
- Case
- [2013] WASCA 40
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Full Court examined the lower court's decision to deny bail pending appeal. The primary consideration was whether the appellants, Santos, had made out a substantial case on appeal. The Court found that the lower court had correctly assessed the merits of the appeal and determined that Santos had not demonstrated a substantial case. The Court also considered whether the balance of convenience favoured granting bail. The Full Court concluded that the lower court was correct in finding that the balance of convenience did not favour Santos. Regarding the application for the appointment of a special commissioner, the Full Court held that it was appropriate to adjourn the application pending the outcome of the appeal.
The Full Court ultimately dismissed the appeal. It found that the lower court's decision to refuse bail pending appeal was correctly made and that the adjournment of the application for the appointment of a special commissioner was appropriate. The appeal was dismissed, and the orders of the lower court were affirmed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.