A PERTH bikie sentenced to more than six years in prison over the shooting of a
rival gxxx's boss has been rebuffed in his bid to appeal the conviction.
Rock Machine member Benjamin Sipkes was convicted in April after a trial in the WA Supreme Court of unlawful wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.
However, he was found not guilty of attempting to murder WA Rebels gaxxx president Nick Martin.
Mr Martin was shot in the arm as he arrived at his home in suburban Balcatta on his Harley-Davidson motorcycle in March last year.
Sipkes was sentenced to six years and four months in prison.
Justice Carmel McLure said in the Court of Appeal today that it was suggested in the closing arguments of the trial that Sipkes had intentionally lied to his partner to lay a false trail.
Justice McLure said the trial judge had directed the jury that any hypothesis on the evidence must be supported by evidence in the case.
"There was nothing in the conduct of the defence case that even hinted at the suggestion made in closing that the appellant had deliberately laid a false trail,'' she said.
Justice McLure said the defence case was "fully and fairly'' put to the jury by the trial judge.
"The appellant has no reasonable prospect of establishing that the deliberate false trail explanation is a reasonable hypothesis on the evidence,'' he said.
"I would refuse leave to appeal and dismiss the appeal.''
Justices Michael Buss and Robert Mazza agreed.
Rock Machine member Benjamin Sipkes was convicted in April after a trial in the WA Supreme Court of unlawful wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.
However, he was found not guilty of attempting to murder WA Rebels gaxxx president Nick Martin.
Mr Martin was shot in the arm as he arrived at his home in suburban Balcatta on his Harley-Davidson motorcycle in March last year.
Sipkes was sentenced to six years and four months in prison.
Justice Carmel McLure said in the Court of Appeal today that it was suggested in the closing arguments of the trial that Sipkes had intentionally lied to his partner to lay a false trail.
Justice McLure said the trial judge had directed the jury that any hypothesis on the evidence must be supported by evidence in the case.
"There was nothing in the conduct of the defence case that even hinted at the suggestion made in closing that the appellant had deliberately laid a false trail,'' she said.
Justice McLure said the defence case was "fully and fairly'' put to the jury by the trial judge.
"The appellant has no reasonable prospect of establishing that the deliberate false trail explanation is a reasonable hypothesis on the evidence,'' he said.
"I would refuse leave to appeal and dismiss the appeal.''
Justices Michael Buss and Robert Mazza agreed.
