New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Insanity

Legal area

Court

12 May 2023

MCMICHAEL v POLICE [2023] NZHC 1125

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1125
Court

High Court

Leave to appeal was granted because the application raised two properly identifiable and arguable questions of law: (1) whether the presiding Judge had jurisdiction to enter not guilty pleas after ordering s 38 health assessments, and (2) whether it is lawful or in the defendant's interests under s 8(1) CP(MIP) Act to postpone a fitness determination and remand solely because no hospital bed is available; the High Court directed that these questions proceed to hearing with timetable directions.
21 Dec 2020

RUSSELL JOHN TULLY v R [2020] NZCA 690

Citation

[2020] NZCA 690
Court

Court of Appeal

On the whole of the evidence, including expert reports and the trial judge's observations, the appellant was fit to stand trial; there was no evidential foundation to leave insanity or sane automatism to the jury and the judge did not err in so ruling; appellant by his conduct forfeited his right to counsel and his exclusion did not render the trial unfair; the new psychiatric evidence admitted on appeal did not establish unfitness or insanity sufficient to overturn the convictions; the sentence of life with a minimum period of 27 years was not manifestly excessive and is affirmed.
14 Oct 2020

FAN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 2696

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2696
Court

High Court

The psychiatric report was admissible and established on the balance of probabilities that the appellant was suffering from a disease of the mind and believed his acts were justified by psychotic delusions; this created a real risk that the guilty pleas and convictions were a miscarriage of justice, therefore the appeal is allowed, the convictions are quashed and no retrial ordered.
25 Mar 2020

R v K [2020] NZHC 646

Citation

[2020] NZHC 646
Court

High Court

On the evidence the defendant met the statutory test for insanity under Crimes Act s 23 at the time of the offending; accordingly the court records a finding of not guilty on account of insanity and remands the defendant to the Mason Clinic for s 23 CPMIP inquiries by two health assessors (one a psychiatrist) to determine appropriate disposition under ss 24 or 25, to be completed within 30 days.
6 Jul 2018

LYTTELTON v R [2018] NZCA 243

Citation

[2018] NZCA 243
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that (1) the recusal application was without merit because prior involvement in a related appeal did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias; (2) the trial Judge's directions were legally adequate in isolating the issue of specific intent for the jury, there was insufficient evidential foundation to leave insanity or automatism to the jury, and refusal to give an orthodox intoxication direction did not amount to error; (3) the jury verdicts were reasonable on the evidence; and (4) the sentencing Judge correctly declined a disputed-facts hearing under s 24 because sufficien…

New Zealand Case Law

MCMICHAEL v POLICE [2023] NZHC 1125

RUSSELL JOHN TULLY v R [2020] NZCA 690

FAN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 2696

R v K [2020] NZHC 646

LYTTELTON v R [2018] NZCA 243