New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Alibi evidence

Legal area

Court

21 Mar 2018

DANIELS v R [2018] NZCA 62

Citation

[2018] NZCA 62
Court

Court of Appeal

The new alibi evidence was not admitted because it was not fresh and lacked sufficient probative cogency to create a real risk of miscarriage of justice (it was consistent with the complainant's evidence that the appellant spent the day with his daughter and therefore did not materially undermine the convictions). On sentencing, a four-year starting point for supply of approximately 13 grams of methamphetamine and a cumulative uplift of 22 months for serious violence (strangulation), multiple threats and prior offending were held to be within the available range and not manifestly excessive;…
28 Jun 2017

JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS v R [2017] NZSC 98

Citation

[2017] NZSC 98
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the matter turned on factual issues now subject to concurrent findings of fact, did not raise a point of general or public importance, and did not disclose a miscarriage of justice; the applicant therefore failed to establish the innocence required for costs on the trial under s 5(2)(f).
7 Apr 2016

KAY v R [2016] NZCA 98

Citation

[2016] NZCA 98
Court

Court of Appeal

Viewed in context the abbreviated perseverance (Papadopoulos) direction was not inadequate or coercive; the jury's subsequent conduct showed no undue pressure; the s127 and s122 directions were adequate for the issues of delay and reliability; the pattern of convictions and acquittals was coherent with the evidence and ages of the complainant; no miscarriage of justice occurred and the appeal is dismissed (extension of time granted).
9 Mar 2007

HITCHINGS V R SC 98/2006

Citation

SC 98/2006
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because there was no failure of proper disclosure: the prosecution had no duty to disclose the telephone record as either the applicant would be aware of making the call or the call was irrelevant if made by another, and the material obtained was disclosed when available; consequently the applicant did not establish a miscarriage of justice or any s13 ground.

New Zealand Case Law

DANIELS v R [2018] NZCA 62

JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS v R [2017] NZSC 98

KAY v R [2016] NZCA 98

HITCHINGS V R SC 98/2006