New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Indictment amendment

Legal area

Court

6 Oct 2015

RAWIRI DAVID LAWSON v R [2015] NZSC 140

Citation

[2015] NZSC 140
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal dismissed because the issues raised did not engage matters of public or general importance and there was no appearance of miscarriage of justice: the DNA on the cigarette, proximity evidence and unexplained cash together with admissible propensity evidence created ample evidence for the jury; the prior burglary was sufficiently similar to be probative; the indictment amendment was not prejudicial and claimed trial irregularities were immaterial.
4 Nov 2013

GASH v R [2013] NZSC 106

Citation

[2013] NZSC 106
Court

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court refused leave because the amendment to the indictment, judged by the particular circumstances, was not unfair or prejudicial to the defence, no legal question of general or public importance arose from the procedural decision (including the incorrect statutory reference), and there was no appearance of miscarriage of justice; accordingly leave was not necessary in the interests of justice under the Supreme Court Act 2003.
3 Feb 2005

Zhang V R SC SC CRI 15/2004

Citation

openlaw-d8043644_cd22_4e0a_91b2_486ab1d6f8d9.pdf
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the Supreme Court was not satisfied the appeal raised issues of general or public importance or a possible substantial miscarriage of justice under s13; the Court of Appeal’s jurisdictional error was harmless, s19(2)(b) of the Interpretation Act preserves the repealed provision for proceedings so repeal posed no barrier, R v Walters could not be distinguished on the facts so s257 applied, and the guilty plea did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice.

New Zealand Case Law

RAWIRI DAVID LAWSON v R [2015] NZSC 140

GASH v R [2013] NZSC 106

Zhang V R SC SC CRI 15/2004