BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 32
Leave to appeal was granted and the appeal was confined to the approved question whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals; an initial hearing was ordered to determine whether exceptional circumstances justify directing an independent practitioner to interview the jury foreperson or...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2019] NZSC 32
- Parties
- Applicant: Brooke Christie Rolleston; Applicant: Brandon James Roche; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 21 March 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Initial Hearing Directed to Determine Whether an Independent Practitioner Should Interview the Jury Foreperson or Jury Members
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; approved question certified; preliminary hearing ordered to determine applications for juror interviews
- Legal Topics
- Conviction Appeal, Jury Interviews, Juror Confidentiality, Publication Restrictions
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Brooke Christie Rolleston
Applicant
Brandon James Roche
Applicant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal to the Supreme Court / Leave to Appeal Granted; Initial Hearing Directed to Determine Whether an Independent Practitioner Should Interview the Jury Foreperson or Jury Members
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals
- 2 Whether orders should be made directing an independent practitioner to interview the jury foreperson or jury members
- 3 Interaction of juror confidentiality and the applicants' right to a fair appeal
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted and the appeal was confined to the approved question whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals; an initial hearing was ordered to determine whether exceptional circumstances justify directing an independent practitioner to interview the jury foreperson or jury members.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; approved question certified; preliminary hearing ordered to determine applications for juror interviews
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted
- Approved question certified: whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 32 [21 March 2019]NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION ORIDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 203OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEEhttp://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/0081/latest/DLM3360350.htmlNOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION ORIDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF ANY COMPLAINANT UNDER THE AGEOF 18 YEARS WHO APPEARED AS A WITNESS OR NAMED WITNESSUNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINALPROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEEhttp://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/0081/latest/DLM3360352.htmlIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI MANA NUISC 17/2019[2019] NZSC 32BETWEEN BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTONApplicantAND THE QUEENRespondentSC 18/2019BETWEEN BRANDON JAMES ROCHEApplicantAND THE QUEENRespondentCourt: William Young, O'Regan and Ellen France JJCounsel: E Huda for ApplicantsK L Kensington for RespondentJudgment: 21 March 2019JUDGMENT OF THE COURTA Leave to appeal is granted to the applicants (Rolleston v R[2018] NZCA 611).B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal wascorrect to dismiss the conviction appeals.____________________________________________________________________REASONS[1] There will be an initial hearing on the appeal to determine whether or not ordersshould be made directing an independent practitioner to interview the jury forepersonor jury members more generally.Solicitors:Patient & Williams, Christchurch for ApplicantsCrown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent