LI V R SC 80/2007
Leave to appeal was granted because the central and determinative legal question for the appeal is whether the appellant was properly convicted under s256(1) rather than s256(2) of the Crimes Act 1961.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- LI V R SC 80/2007
- Parties
- Appellant: Rebecca Katszi Li; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 18 March 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Granted
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted.
- Legal Topics
- S256(1) Vs S256(2) Crimes Act 1961, Conviction Correctness, 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
Rebecca Katszi Li
Appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant was rightly convicted under s256(1) of the Crimes Act 1961 as opposed to s256(2)
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted because the central and determinative legal question for the appeal is whether the appellant was properly convicted under s256(1) rather than s256(2) of the Crimes Act 1961.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted.
- Approved ground for appeal: whether the appellant was rightly convicted under s256(1) of the Crimes Act 1961 as opposed to s256(2).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
LI V R SC 80/2007 18 March 2008IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 80/2007 [2008] NZSC 16 REBECCA KATSZI LIvTHE QUEENCourt: Tipping, McGrath and Anderson JJ Counsel: B J Hart for Appellant M E Ball for Crown Judgment: 18 March 2008JUDGMENT OF THE COURT A The application for leave to appeal is granted. B The approved ground is whether the appellant was rightly convicted of an offence against s 256(1) of the Crimes Act 1961 as opposed to s 256(2).Solicitors: Crown Law Office, Wellington