New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal CITATION : Regina v Cornelissen [1999] NSWCCA 211 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60784 of 1998 HEARING DATE(S) : 29 July 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 29 July 1999 PARTIES : Regina v Peter Joseph Paul Cornellissen JUDGMENT OF : Dunford J at 6 & 8; Hidden J at 7; Smart AJ at 1-5 LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court N/A - papers destroyed. LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : Trial at Parkes 15 & 16/2/93 Sentence on 18/2/93. LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : Mahoney DCJ COUNSEL : P. Byrne SC for the Appellant C.K. Maxwell QC for the Respondent SOLICITORS : Palmers for the Appellant S E O'Connor for the Respondent CATCHWORDS : Criminal Law - Police fabricate evidence against appellant ACTS CITED : -Nil- CASES CITED: -Nil- DECISION : Extend time to appeal out of time; Appeal allowed; Conviction quashed; Verdict of Acquittal entered. - 2 - IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 060784/98 DUNFORD J HIDDEN J SMART AJ THURSDAY, 29 JULY, 1999 REGINA V PETER JOSEPH PAUL CORNEILISSEN JUDGMENT 1 SMART AJ : Peter Joseph Paul Corneilissen applies for an extension of time in which to appeal against his conviction of supplying a traffickable quantity of prohibited drugs, namely amphetamines, in November 1991. Judge Mahoney sentenced him, on 18 February 1993, to a minimum term of nine months and an additional term of thirteen months. 2 Three detectives went to the premises of the appellant at Forbes taking a quantity of amphetamines with them. The detectives " loaded up " the appellant with such amphetamines. They weighed up the amphetamines in front of the appellant and then charged him with the offence mentioned. They supported that charge by giving false evidence. This was wicked conduct and a serious abuse of power. 3 During the Royal Commission into the New South Wales Police Service the detectives involved admitted the foregoing conduct. 4 The Crown accepts that its case rested entirely upon police evidence which was subsequently admitted to be fabricated by the police. Accordingly, the Crown concedes, and correctly so, that the appeal should be upheld and a verdict of acquittal entered. 5 The following orders should be made: 1. Extend time until today in which the applicant may appeal. 2. Appeal allowed, conviction quashed. 3. Verdict of acquittal entered. 6 DUNFORD J: I agree. 7 HIDDEN J: I agree. 8 DUNFORD J: The orders will be as indicated by Justice Smart. ********** 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.