13 Apr 2023
Leave to appeal was refused because the alleged directions and evidential rulings did not disclose an error of law or a risk of miscarriage and the Court of Appeal and trial judge lawfully applied principles on consent, expert evidence and propensity evidence; no question of general or public importance was established.
28 Jul 2022
The Court held the trial judge's directions on consent (including that reluctant consent is still consent) were adequate and focused on the elements relevant to the case; the Sally summary of facts was admissible propensity evidence under s43 Evidence Act 2006 because it showed a highly probative pattern of domination and control relevant to consent and the defendant's state of mind; the psychologist's evidence was used properly to explain common victim responses and was not a diagnosis of the complainant; any Crown comment on the absent midwife was cured by the judge's directions; and the se…
13 May 2022
The High Court held the starting point and uplifts were within the available range given the repeated strangulations, associated assaults, presence of children and offending while on parole; the sentencing Judge properly considered totality and applied appropriate discounts, so the three years nine months' sentence was not manifestly excessive.
22 Mar 2021
On the totality of the trial and surveillance evidence, and applying Sentencing Act s24 and established principles on circumstantial inference, the Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the methamphetamine involved was approximately 70% pure and that the defendant possessed the following amounts for supply: charge 10 — 160 grams; charge 11 — 280 grams; charge 12 — 84 grams; charge 13 (representative) — 1,000 grams; total 1,524 grams. The Court may therefore treat these findings as aggravating facts at sentencing.
3 May 2018
Extension of time granted; jury verdict on representative charge was not unreasonable because complainant gave sufficient specific evidence of repeated digital penetration and jury entitled to prefer her evidence despite inconsistencies; acquittal on specific charge was not inconsistent with conviction on representative charge because jury could reject date-specific evidence yet accept evidence of other incidents; sentencing starting point of 7.5 years fell within band two and was not manifestly excessive; refusal to grant good character discount was not erroneous; suppression order under s20…
23 Apr 2018
The Court held that, on the totality of evidence—admissions, intercepted communications, structured Western Union transfers, the USD 70,000 drop-off, the FedEx/Rakaia package link and the DEA expert opinion—the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant imported at least six kilograms of cocaine; therefore the appeal against sentence fails and the sentence is affirmed.
12 Aug 2016
The jury could properly find the invoice figures were false because they represented amounts not charged and not owing by the offshore operators, thereby misrepresenting what General Travel was owed, and there was sufficient evidence to infer a deliberate intention to deceive from the appellant's conduct and the contradiction with the parties' agreed memorandum of understanding.
5 Apr 2016
Question about frequency was justified by prior unprompted evidence and not improperly leading; directions on consent and reasonable belief were adequate in context and additional directions would risk undermining the primary denial defence; suggestion of motive to lie was peripheral and did not shift the burden of proof; complainant's evidence sufficed to support the representative charge; sentencing was well within range and discounts were appropriately applied; accordingly appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed.