ROBINSON V R [2015] NZCA 203
Leave to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed on the basis that the District Court ruling admitting certificates of conviction under s49 Evidence Act 2006 was correct and the appellant cannot now challenge the fact of those convictions; the complainant and propensity witnesses will give viva voce evidence...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] NZCA 203
- Parties
- Appellant: John Alfred Robinson; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 27 May 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal (application for Leave) / Leave Application and Appeal Hearing in Court of Appeal; Trial Pending in District Court
- Outcome
- A Application for leave to appeal granted. B Appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Certificates of Conviction, Propensity Evidence, Section 49 Evidence Act 2006, Pre Trial Rulings, Publication Prohibition
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
John Alfred Robinson
Appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (application for Leave) / Leave Application and Appeal Hearing in Court of Appeal; Trial Pending in District Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether certificates of conviction are admissible under s49 of the Evidence Act 2006
- 2 Whether the appellant can challenge the fact of previous convictions proved by certificates
- 3 Admissibility and procedure for propensity evidence including viva voce testimony
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted but the appeal was dismissed on the basis that the District Court ruling admitting certificates of conviction under s49 Evidence Act 2006 was correct and the appellant cannot now challenge the fact of those convictions; the complainant and propensity witnesses will give viva voce evidence and be subject to cross-examination; a publication prohibition was appropriate until final disposition of the trial.
Court Disposition
A Application for leave to appeal granted. B Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted.
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
ROBINSON V R [2015] NZCA 203 [27 May 2015]NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION ORIDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BYS 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OFCOMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICEACT 1985.ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANYPART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWSMEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLEDATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION INLAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA267/2015[2015] NZCA 203BETWEEN JOHN ALFRED ROBINSONAppellantAND THE QUEENRespondentHearing: 27 May 2015Court: Randerson, Stevens and White JJCounsel: E J Forster for AppellantG A Kelly for RespondentJudgment: 27 May 2015 at 4.00 pmJUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The application for leave to appeal is granted.B The appeal is dismissed.C Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publiclyavailable database until final disposition of trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.____________________________________________________________________RESULT(Reasons to follow)[1] We propose to issue reasons for judgment at a later date. We were told the trial of Mr Robinson is due to start in the District Court on 2 June 2015.[2] We therefore record two matters relevant to the forthcoming trial. First Mrs Kelly, counsel for the respondent, confirmed that the complainant, N, would give her evidence viva voce. The same is the case in respect of the propensity witnesses, S and P. They will both be called, will give their evidence orally and will be available for cross-examination.[3] In the case of the propensity witness P, Mr Robinson pleaded guilty in January 1992 to three charges of sexual offending against her. He was also found guilty of three further charges following a trial at which he pleaded not guilty. The certificates of conviction for the six convictions will be produced by the Crown as exhibits in order to prove the convictions.[4] At the pre-trial hearing in the District Court Mr Forster challenged the admissibility of the certificates under s 49 of the Evidence Act 2006. The Judge rejected this challenge and directed that the Crown will be entitled to tender certificates of conviction on each of the six charges.1 Mr Forster confirmed to us that the ruling meant his client could not now challenge the fact of the convictions.Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent1 New Zealand Police v Robinson [2015] NZDC 6821.