Likumbo Makasa v R [2015] NSWCCA 259

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Likumbo Makasa v R [2015] NSWCCA 259 Hearing dates: 14 August 2015 Date of orders: 14 August 2015 Decision date: 14 August 2015 Before: Ward JA at [1]; Adams J at [32]; Beech-Jones J at [33] Decision: Application for an extension of time for the appeal against conviction is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – application for extension of time to appeal against conviction – previous appeal against conviction on different count on same indictment – where the Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61J, 66C(3) Cases Cited: Morgan v R (No 2) [2013] NSWCCA 80 R v Grierson (1933) 50 WN (NSW) 71 R v Tyrone Chishimba, Tyrone Chishimba v R; Likumbo Makasa v R,R v Likumbo Makasa; Mumbi Peter Mulenga v R, R v Mumbi Peter Mulenga (2010) NSWCCA 228 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Likumbo Makasa (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: No Appearance (Applicant) Ms T Smith (Respondent)

Solicitors:

Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): 2007/00014574022 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment 1. WARD JA: I am of the view that the application for an extension of time to appeal from the conviction on the counts in question should be dismissed and I will indicate briefly my reasons for that view. 2. By notice dated 29 January 2013, Mr Makasa has sought an extension of time in which to appeal against his conviction on 19 August 2009 of three counts of sexual intercourse with a child above 14 years and under the age of 16 years contrary to s 66C(3) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). 3. The proposed grounds of appeal broadly contend that Mr Makasa's conviction on those three counts is unsafe and unsatisfactory and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence. They include the contention that the conviction was obtained by a combination of incompetence and deception and that as a result a miscarriage of justice has occurred. It is contended that there were material irregularities, the nature of which has not been identified in any submissions by Mr Makasa in the course of the trial. 4. Mr Makasa was represented at the trial. He is not represented on the present application. There has been no appearance by Mr Makasa this morning when the matter was listed for hearing of this application and the transcript will record the attempts that have been made to confirm that Mr Makasa is aware that the matter is listed for hearing on this day.