FERRI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZCA 181

FERRI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZCA 181 [5 June 2018]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROACA583/2017[2018] NZCA 181BETWEEN CHRIS MATTHEW FERRI ANDKARLA WHITEApplicantsAND NEW ZEALAND POLICERespondentCourt: French, Ellis and Woolford JJCounsel: Applicants in personK Peirse-O'Byrne for RespondentJudgment:(On the papers)5 June 2018 at 10.00 amJUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The application for an extension of time is granted.B The application for leave to bring a second appeal is declined.____________________________________________________________________REASONS OF THE COURT(Given by Woolford J)Introduction[1] Mr Ferri and Ms White were found guilty of disorderly behaviour1 followinga five-day judge-alone trial before Judge Roberts in the District Court at Kaikohe on1 March 2017.2 Mr Ferri was found guilty of a further charge of wilful damage.1 Summary Offences Act 1981, s 3.2 New Zealand Police v Ferri [2017] NZDC 4550.Mr Ferri was sentenced to 80 hours' community work and ordered to pay reparationof $522.41. Fines of $1,322 were remitted as part of the sentencing process. Ms Whitewas sentenced to 40 hours' community work.3[2] In the High Court, Hinton J dismissed an appeal against conviction, butallowed an appeal against sentence. Mr Ferri's sentence of community work wasreduced to 40 hours' community work, while Ms White's sentence of community workwas replaced with a fine of $250.4[3] Mr Ferri and Ms White now seek leave to bring a second appeal againstconviction. The application was filed out of time. We grant the necessary extensionas the delay was not long and the Crown did not indicate it opposed the extension.Test to be applied[4] To grant leave, we must be satisfied that the appeal involves a matter of generalor public importance, such as an issue of "general principle or of general importancein the administration of the criminal law by the Courts",5 or that a miscarriage ofjustice may have occurred.6Factual background[5] Mr Ferri and Ms White were involved in a prolonged incident outside thePaihia Police Station in the very early hours of Christmas Day 2015, during the courseof which they shouted at the police officers inside the building and other peoplestanding nearby. One of the neighbours threatened violence against them because ofthe noise they were making. Mr Ferri also kicked the front door to the police station,causing the glass panel to break.[6] The catalyst was apparently the arrest earlier that evening of the boyfriend ofMs White's daughter.3 New Zealand Police v Ferri [2017] NZDC 4335.4 White v New Zealand Police [2017] NZHC 1983.5 Keenan v R [2005] NZSC 63 at [5]; cited in McAllister v R [2014] NZCA 175, [2014] 2 NZLR764 at [36].6 Criminal Procedure Act 2011, ss 237(3) and 253(3).Discussion[7] Mr Ferri and Ms White seek leave to bring a second appeal on the ground thatthe Courts of New Zealand have no jurisdiction:The New Zealand Governments and its judicial system are enforcing itssovereignty through physical revolution transferred at the point of a gun,whereby the sovereignty of the people of New Zealand has been usurped byParliament and the Courts?CEASE AND DESIST!The conviction and sentence should be quashed, with an apology includingcosts of $300,000 @ $100,000 per year, from the period of 25 December 2015till conclusion of this matter 2018.[8] The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty is undoubtedly of general or publicimportance, but as noted by Hinton J,7 it is well settled that arguments challenging thegeneral law-making authority of the New Zealand Parliament cannot succeed: alitigant is not entitled to put themselves outside of the law of New Zealand.8[9] The jurisdictional issue was in fact canvassed in a separate appeal against apre-trial ruling of Judge Davis that the District Court had jurisdiction to hear the case.In the High Court, Gilbert J dismissed the appeal protesting the jurisdiction ofthe Court, again for the reason that the law-making authority of the New ZealandParliament is unquestionable.9[10] The claim of lack of jurisdiction made by Mr Ferri and Ms White is withoutmerit.Result[11] The application for an extension of time is granted.[12] There is no matter of general or public importance that would justify a secondappeal. There is also no indication of a miscarriage of justice.7 White v New Zealand Police, above n 4, at [16].8 Mitchell v R CA68/04, 23 August 2004 at [14]; and Morunga v New Zealand Police [2016] NZCA599 at [7]–[8].9 White v New Zealand Police [2016] NZHC 1617 at [3]; citing Mitchell v R, above n 8, at [14].[13] The application for leave to bring a second appeal is declined.Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent