REGINA v LOUIS BAYEH [1997] NSWCA 262

REGINA v LOUIS BAYEH

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL

MASON P, POWELL and STEIN JJA 7 August 1997, 7 August 1997 [1997] NSWCA 262

Criminal law — Bail — claimant guilty of attempting to pervert course of justice — refusal of bail by trial judge — application to single judge of Supreme Court and referral to Court of Appeal — whether custodial sentence likely — effect of pending appeal — Bail Act 1978, s30AA — whether exceptional circumstances

Mason P The applicant for bail, Mr Louis Bayeh, was charged in January 1995 with attempt to pervert the course of justice. He was committed for trial. The trial commenced on 2 July 1997 before his Honour Acting Judge Stewart in the District Court at Sydney. On 4 July at the completion of the Crown case and in the absence of the jury, after a no case submission was rejected, the applicant pleaded guilty to the charge. The jury was directed to return a verdict of guilty, which they did.

Bail was applied for pending sentence. It was proposed the matter stand over for several months. The first ground that was advanced at that stage was the need for access to counsel, particularly having regard to the fact that as matters then stood the applicant had been committed for trial on two counts of demanding money with menaces and a trial for those matters had been fixed for 21 July 1997. The second basis of the application was the health of the applicant and his need for readier access to medical treatment than would otherwise have been available. Although the Crown did not oppose bail, it was refused by the learned trial Judge.

In some preliminary remarks his Honour said that the prisoner had been convicted of a most serious charge, being one that struck at the administration of justice and which was reprehensible in the extreme. The prisoner had, as he was entitled, pleaded not guilty, but in so doing and then changing his plea at the eleventh hour it could, in his Honour's view, be said quite fairly that he could expect no discount in relation to any sentence that may be imposed upon him for pleading guilty at an early stage. Responding to the grounds that were advanced, which I have summarised already, his Honour said: