HARRIMAN V R SC 28/2008
Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds were fact‑specific, did not raise questions of general or public importance, and did not establish a miscarriage of justice; the Court of Appeal's confirmation showed the sentence was open to the trial judge.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- SC 28/2008
- Parties
- Applicant: Allen Louis Harriman; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 7 August 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal (application Dismissed)
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Importation of Drugs, Possession for Supply, Conspiracy to Supply, Sentence Review, Leave to Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Allen Louis Harriman
Applicant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal (application Dismissed)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal should be granted on a question of general or public importance
- 2 Whether admission of evidence or the trial judge's summing up caused a miscarriage of justice
- 3 Whether the sentence raised a question of principle warranting this Court's review
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds were fact‑specific, did not raise questions of general or public importance, and did not establish a miscarriage of justice; the Court of Appeal's confirmation showed the sentence was open to the trial judge.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
HARRIMAN V R SC 28/2008 7 August 2008IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 28/2008 [2008] NZSC 62 ALLEN LOUIS HARRIMANvTHE QUEENCourt: Blanchard, Tipping and McGrath JJ Counsel: Applicant in Person A Markham and L Van Dam for Crown Judgment: 7 August 2008JUDGMENT OF THE COURT The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. REASONS[1] The applicant has sought leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal's dismissal of his appeal against conviction and sentence on charges of importing, possessing for supply and conspiring to supply certain class A and B drugs. He had pleaded guilty to some other drug charges and was sentenced for those also. The effective sentence was one of 12 years imprisonment with a minimum period before release of six years six months.[2] His submissions in support of the application have been considered. They traverse a number of proposed grounds of appeal but each is specific to the facts of the particular case and no question of general or public importance is raised. Nor are we persuaded that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred from the admission of the evidence to which the applicant has referred or from the trial Judge's summing up or from any other circumstance mentioned by the applicant. [3] No question of principle is engaged by the proposed sentence appeal. The Court of Appeal has confirmed the sentence as one which was open to the trial Judge and nothing raised by the applicant provides any basis for a further review by this Court.Solicitors: Crown Law Office, Wellington