GREER V R SC 42/2006

GREER V R SC 42/2006 20 July 2006IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 42/2006 [2006] NZSC 53 ALAN IVO GREERvTHE QUEENCourt: Elias CJ, McGrath and Anderson JJ Counsel: Applicant in person Judgment: 20 July 2006JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. REASONS[1] Mr Greer seeks leave to appeal to this Court from a judgment of the Court of Appeal in a case involving the refusal by the High Court of his application for a writ of habeas corpus. The applicant sought habeas corpus on the ground that he has been denied his right to appeal against his conviction by the District Court on charges of sexual offending and the sentence of seven years' imprisonment imposed on him for that offending on 14 July 2004. The essence of his complaint is that the registry of the Court of Appeal refused to accept documents initiating his appeal.[2] In the habeas corpus proceedings, both the High Court and the Court of Appeal were satisfied that the applicant was properly detained under a warrant of committal to imprisonment. The High Court declined to inquire further into the applicant's claims that the Court of Appeal registry had wrongly rejected notices of appeal. The Court of Appeal did accept that the rejection of documents might properly fall for consideration on another occasion but decided that the appropriate redress to be sought by the applicant was to pursue an application to appeal. In order to facilitate that, the Court issued a Minute immediately after it delivered judgment dismissing the appeal in the present proceedings, the purpose of which was to progress the hearing by the Court of an appeal against the conviction and sentence for the sexual offending. [3] Mr Greer has nevertheless sought to appeal to this Court against dismissal of the habeas corpus proceedings. He has now filed written submissions in support of his application. They reiterate his grievances over rejection of his notices of appeal to the Court of Appeal and complain of the difficulties he has faced in preparing submissions in the prison environment. He seeks an oral hearing to advance his application for leave to appeal. [4] Having considered his submissions, we are satisfied that no useful purpose would be served by an oral hearing on the application. Mr Greer's desire to have a further appeal to this Court in order to have his conviction and sentence set aside because of the difficulties he has encountered in having his appeal heard is clearly hopeless. The proposed appeal does not raise any issue of general or public importance, nor is there any indication that a substantial miscarriage of justice may have occurred in refusing habeas corpus. It is not in the interests of justice for the Court to hear and determine the proposed appeal. There is no suggestion in the applicant's submissions that the measures taken by the Court of Appeal outlined in its Minute of 18 May in order to facilitate the consideration of his appeal are proving ineffective and, as the Court of Appeal said, that is the course he should be pursuing. [5] The application is accordingly dismissed.Solicitors: Crown Law Office, Wellington