New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Alibi

Legal area

Court

18 Dec 2023

B (CA588/2021) v R [2023] NZCA 655

Citation

[2023] NZCA 655
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the behavioural evidence was admissible as contextual material responsive to the defence and its limited use without a bespoke direction did not render the verdict unsafe; the covert family recording by a private actor was admissible and reliable for the jury to weigh; the Bathurst alibi was not materially advanced by post-trial evidence of live screening and replay possibilities removed reasonable doubt on charge 1; failure to cross-examine on a collateral employment date was not a miscarriage of justice; extension of time and leave to adduce further evidence were granted and…
22 Dec 2020

KISSLING v R [2021] NZCA 6

Citation

[2021] NZCA 6
Court

Court of Appeal

Although trial counsel omitted to advise about the statutory ineligibility for bail and the alibi notice issue, and may have given a pessimistic impression about acquittal prospects, those failures did not create a real risk that the trial outcome was affected; the appellant entered a voluntary, informed guilty plea after appreciation of the merits and available evidence, so no miscarriage of justice occurred and the appeal is dismissed.
27 Jul 2020

FENTON v R [2020] NZHC 1832

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1832
Court

High Court

Although trial counsel was mistaken about s73 and should have taken steps (seek adjournment, contact co-defendant's counsel or obtain the co-defendant's willingness to testify) such error did not produce a real risk the verdict was unsafe because the proposed exculpatory account was implausible and contradicted reliable objective evidence; accordingly the appeal is dismissed though extension of time is granted.
19 Sept 2018

HEWITT v R [2018] NZCA 374

Citation

[2018] NZCA 374
Court

Court of Appeal

The prosecutor's challenge to the appellant's alibi crossed the protection in s32 of the Evidence Act 2006 and the judge was obliged to give the statutory s32 direction but failed to do so; despite that breach, on the facts and strength of the Crown case the omission did not cause a miscarriage of justice and convictions stand; however the original sentence was manifestly excessive and was reduced to reflect totality, treatment and rehabilitation needs, and inappropriate uplift for historical convictions was not sustained; permanent suppression ordered for specified paragraphs of judgment.
10 May 2018

AVISON v R [2018] NZCA 146

Citation

[2018] NZCA 146
Court

Court of Appeal

Although prior conviction evidence had probative value for the dismissed perverting charge, the trial judge's clear direction to the jury to disregard that evidence combined with overwhelming independent eyewitness evidence meant no real risk of unfair prejudice and the convictions were safe; appeal dismissed.
7 Feb 2018

HENARE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 65

Citation

[2018] NZHC 65
Court

High Court

The appeal was dismissed because the alibi was incomplete with unexplained time during the relevant period and the DNA evidence (a single male profile on a cigarette butt found lit inside the burgled garage) provided strong evidence of the appellant's presence with no plausible innocent explanation; therefore the trial judge did not err to an extent causing a miscarriage of justice.
19 Dec 2017

R v TAIKATO [2017] NZHC 3249

Citation

[2017] NZHC 3249
Court

High Court

The application to vacate guilty pleas is dismissed because the defendant entered his pleas knowingly and voluntarily after informed advice, expressly admitted culpability to counsel, and the proffered alibi and supporting affidavits were not credible or persuasive; therefore no miscarriage of justice would result from requiring the defendant to maintain his guilty pleas.
25 Aug 2017

AVISON v R [2017] NZCA

Citation

openlaw-49d0caf1_cf9c_493d_9f87_6c1e87199c2f.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

Forging and using false official records to conceal offending is a distinctive and unusual act that establishes a specific propensity relevant to whether the defendant altered his logbook to support an alibi; the probative value of the 2005 convictions outweighs the risk of unfair prejudice given the distinctiveness of the conduct and explanations for the temporal gap (periods of imprisonment and activation of propensity by need).
5 May 2017

WOOSTER v THE QUEEN [2017] NZHC 893

Citation

[2017] NZHC 893
Court

High Court

Convictions and sentence were upheld because the trial evidence (complainant identification, contemporaneous texts and rejected alibi evidence) sufficiently established presence, identity and lack of any legitimate debt; absence of Mr Broughton did not make the convictions unsafe; the sentence fell within an appropriate range and discounts were properly applied.
16 Dec 2010

PETER MULLER V R SC SC 104/2010

Citation

SC 104/2010
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds failed the statutory s13 criteria: the further evidence did not establish an alibi or alter the trial's outcome, the admission of identification evidence caused only slight and immaterial prejudice, and the stay application was untenable under existing Supreme Court authority; consequently no arguable miscarriage of justice was shown.