Man appeals murder conviction on basis of bad legal advice
A SUNSHINE Coast man convicted over the execution death of a friend has appealed his conviction on the grounds he received incorrect legal advice.
Career criminal Shane Michael Oulds, 42, was sentenced to life imprisonment in 2012 after being found guilty of shooting his mate five times at close range before leaving him to die alone on a Sunshine Coast hinterland road.
A passing motorist discovered Jye Raymond Burn's body on July 8, 2010, on the side of the Old Caloundra Rd, near Landsborough, with bullet wounds to the face, chest and neck from a .32 calibre revolver.
On the night Mr Burns, who was originally from Dalby, was murdered he had been on a pub crawl from Maroochydore to Mooloolaba with Oulds and their acquaintance Shane Moroney who subsequently testified at the murder trial.
However, the wannabe bikie claimed he was never afforded the opportunity to tell his version of events at his Brisbane Supreme Court trial based on advice he received from his legal team, which consisted of respected solicitor Peter Shields and barrister Tony Kimmons.
The claim forms the basis of his appeal which was heard on Tuesday (April 15) in the Queensland Court of Appeal.
He has engaged top New South Wales barrister Winston Terracini to handle the appeal on his behalf.
Oulds, who was present in court, gave evidence that he would be prepared to testify if he was granted a retrial.
Crown Prosecutor Michael Byrne seized on the opportunity to outline Ould's extensive criminal history, which spans two decades and includes charges for assault, armed robbery, extortion, home invasions, weapons, grievous bodily harm and eventually murder.
Oulds admitted he had used the services of Mr Shields numerous times in the past including when on trial over the shooting of another person in the years prior to his eventual murder conviction.
He told the court he did not "know what to expect" during the murder trial because he "thought it was conducted differently" to previous trials he had faced despite the fact he had signed a client instruction sheet stating he would not call any evidence or testify at both the previous shooting and subsequent murder trials.
"They advised me that if I gave evidence my criminal history would be aired," he said.
"Tony Kimmons also told me it was imperative that he had the last reply when addressing the jury.
"I trusted Tony.
"I did not think things ran the same in a murder trial."
Mr Byrne then suggested Ould's was fabricating his evidence to suit his current predicament, a claim he denied.
"I always wanted to give evidence at my trial," he said.
"I gave instructions, on their advice, that I wanted the murder trial run like the previous trial.
"I eventually had a gutful of Peter Shields because I felt as though he was not listening to my instructions.
"I lost respect for him and lost trust in him during the trial."
Mr Byrnes told the court the only reason Ould's had chosen not to testify was because if he did the circumstances of the case would have ensured he was placed into protective custody in prison.
He told the court Oulds was fearful of being labelled a "dog" in prison, which would have ensured he had a target on his head.
Oulds denied the claim saying "that had nothing to do with it."
Solicitor Peter Shields told the court his instruction from Oulds was to conduct the trial in a similar vein to the previous trial he represented him in.
"Whether Oulds got into the witness box or not was a matter for him," he said.
"I had no vested interest either way.
"I did advise him he would be questioned about his criminal history if he did.
"Oddly the only time he ever raised concerns with how the trial was conducted was in the cells after the verdict."