28 Jun 2022
The appellant is lawfully detained pursuant to a valid District Court warrant issued under s 168(4) Criminal Procedure Act 2011; sovereignty and colonisation arguments do not remove him from the jurisdiction of New Zealand law; habeas corpus is not available to collaterally attack alleged trial errors or non-detaining grievances, therefore the application and appeal must be dismissed.
7 Apr 2017
The appellants' arguments that aboriginal title and Māori sovereignty remained unextinguished do not raise a question of law of sufficient merit or general/public importance and have no real prospect of success; accordingly leave to appeal under s120 was declined and, because the appeal is not readily arguable, a stay of execution was also declined (notwithstanding potential hardship), with costs awarded to the Crown for the leave application on a 1A basis.
22 Jun 2016
Claims that native sovereignty or traveller's permits remove a person from the jurisdiction of New Zealand courts are not justiciable and do not negate statutory obligations; therefore the Land Transport Act applies and the defendant remains subject to criminal law, so the appeal against conviction and sentence fails.