WILK v R [2022] NZCA 404
Dismissal was warranted because the appellant repeatedly failed to comply with explicit Court directions to file particularised grounds of appeal, provided no reasonable explanation for the ongoing delay, and was put on formal notice that non-compliance risked dismissal under s 338; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] NZCA 404
- Parties
- Appellant: Ryszard Wilk; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 26 August 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal (sentence) / Decision Appeal Dismissed for Failure to Comply With Directions
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal, Failure to Comply With Court Directions, Dismissal Under S 338 Criminal Procedure Act 2011, Importation and Supply of Controlled Drugs, Sentence Review
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ryszard Wilk
Appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (sentence) / Decision Appeal Dismissed for Failure to Comply With Directions
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court should dismiss the appeal for failure to file particularised grounds despite repeated directions
- 2 Application of s 338 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 to dismiss for non-compliance
Ratio Decidendi
Dismissal was warranted because the appellant repeatedly failed to comply with explicit Court directions to file particularised grounds of appeal, provided no reasonable explanation for the ongoing delay, and was put on formal notice that non-compliance risked dismissal under s 338; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
WILK v R [2022] NZCA 404 [26 August 2022]IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDI TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROACA450/2021[2022] NZCA 404BETWEEN RYSZARD WILKAppellantAND THE QUEENRespondentCourt: French, Gilbert and Collins JJJudgment:(On the papers)26 August 2022 at 3 pmJUDGMENT OF THE COURTThe appeal is dismissed.____________________________________________________________________REASONS OF THE COURT(Given by French J)[1] On 21 July 2021, Mr Wilk filed an appeal against a prison sentence imposedon him for importing cocaine, conspiring to import cocaine, supplying cocaine andpossessing cocaine for the purposes of supply.1[2] In a minute dated 7 December 2021, Miller J directed Mr Wilk to file fullparticulars of his grounds of appeal by 28 January 2022.[3] The particulars were never filed and in a minute dated 7 June 2022, French Jdirected that Mr Wilk file his grounds of appeal by 4 pm 22 June 2022.1 The term of the prison sentence was ten years and seven months with a minimum period ofimprisonment of four years and three months: R v Lukasik [2021] NZHC 1494.[4] When that direction was also not complied with, French J issued a furtherminute dated 29 July 2022 stating that the continuing delay was unacceptable. Theminute gave Mr Wilk formal notice that unless he filed his grounds of appeal byMonday 12 August 2022, he was at risk of the Court exercising its powers unders 338(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 and dismissing his appeal.[5] 12 August has been and gone and the particularised grounds of appeal havestill not been filed. There has been no reasonable explanation for the continuingnon-compliance.[6] The appeal is accordingly dismissed.Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent