New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

New Zealand Case Law

Co-conspirator evidence

  • 6 Sept 2019

    DHEIL v R [2019] NZCA 416

    Citation
    [2019] NZCA 416
    Court
    Court of Appeal

    The admission of the recorded conversation did not cause a miscarriage of justice because the pre-trial admissibility threshold remained satisfied and, in any event, statements in the recording were not hearsay as their makers gave evidence and were cross-examined; hearsay evidence by the co-defendant about third parties did not prejudice the appellant because it supported the defence and was relied on by the appellant; differing verdicts were logically reconcilable where the jury could find the co-defendant a neutral messenger while finding the appellant a party; the sentence of 10 months' h…

  • 20 Dec 2017

    EDWARDSON v R [2017] NZCA 618

    Citation
    [2017] NZCA 618
    Court
    Court of Appeal

    The Court held the Crown's case — intercepted communications, Contac-NT supply, forensic residue and circumstantial links to the storage unit — provided a sufficient evidential foundation for reasonable juries to convict; trial judge's directions and s 147 rulings were correct; sentencing judge was entitled under s 24 and established authorities to infer from the totality that at least one kilogram of methamphetamine was manufactured and to fix starting points accordingly; some sentence adjustments were required to avoid double counting and to moderate uplifts for prior record, and limited mi…

  • 18 Dec 2015

    AFAMASAGA V R, MAKALIMA V R AND BANABA V R [2015] NZCA 615

    Citation
    (2015) 27 CRNZ 640
    Court
    Court of Appeal

    The Court dismissed all appeals: the trial judge's directions on self-defence were legally sufficient and properly explained burden and subjective/objective elements; the admission and limited use of contested text messages and gang evidence did not cause a miscarriage of justice because the jury were properly instructed; there was sufficient evidence to convict Banaba and Makalima as parties under s66 (incitement/encouragement and common purpose principles) and the differing verdicts were not inconsistent given evidence of Makalima's cognitive impairment supporting manslaughter only; withdra…