Regina v Jeans [2005] NSWCCA 73

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Regina v Jeans [2005] NSWCCA 73

HEARING DATE(S): 7/3/05

JUDGMENT DATE: 6 July 2005

JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ at 1; Grove J at 2; Bell J at 3

DECISION: Application for leave to appeal allowed; Appeal dismissed

Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990

Davern v Messel (1984) 155 CLR 21 Parisienne Basket Shoes Pty Ltd v Whyte (1937-1938) 59 CLR 369 CASES CITED: R v Nicolaidis (1994) 72 A Crim R 394 Rogers v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 251 Subramaniam v the Queen [2004] HCA 51; (2004) 211 ALR 1

Regina (Respondent) PARTIES: Anthony John Jeans (Applicant)

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2004/2674

T. Warwick (Applicant) COUNSEL: D Frearson SC (Crown)

F Wilson (Applicant) SOLICITORS: S Kavanagh (Respondent)

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 99/41/0227

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Mahoney ADCJ

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 2004/2674

SPIGELMAN CJ GROVE J BELL J

Wednesday 6 July 2005 Regina v Anthony John Jeans Judgment 1 SPIGELMAN CJ: I agree with Bell J.

2 GROVE J: I agree with Bell J.

3 BELL J: This is an application for leave to appeal brought by Anthony John Jeans against an interlocutory order made by Mahoney ADCJ (the Judge) on 7 October 2004, that the question of his unfitness to be tried be set down for hearing by a judge and jury. 4 The order was made by the Judge following the dismissal of a motion brought by the applicant claiming an order permanently staying proceedings on an indictment that charged him with sexual offences against a complainant, CK. The offences are alleged to have been committed between 1 and 4 May 1998. 5 A chronology prepared on the applicant's behalf was tendered on the hearing of his motion. The Judge incorporated it in his reasons, noting that its contents had not been disputed. The chronology recorded that the applicant had been arrested on 25 May 1999, committed for trial on 25 October 1999 and arraigned at a call-over on 24 July 2000. A document described as a District Court Results Sheet (the results sheet) containing brief particulars of the proceedings before the District Court on that occasion was in evidence. It recorded: "Defence indicate PNG SONS btc." It is not in issue that this may be interpreted as reading, "Defence indicate plea not guilty. Stood over next sittings. Bail to continue." 6 The proceedings before the Judge were approached both by the applicant and the Crown upon the common assumption that on 24 July 2000 the applicant had been arraigned upon an indictment that charged him with sexual offences against CK.