Alister James Reid v The Queen
[2017] NZSC 108
•7 July 2017
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND |
| SC 29/2017 [2017] NZSC 108 |
| BETWEEN | ALISTER JAMES REID |
| AND | THE QUEEN |
| Court: | William Young, OʼRegan and Ellen France JJ |
Counsel: | J S Jefferson for Applicant |
Judgment: | 7 July 2017 |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
____________________________________________________________________
REASONS
The applicant was found guilty at trial of aggravated robbery and demanding with menaces. The victim having died in a motorcycle accident before trial, the Crown relied as part of its case on the account of events given by the victim to a detective. Pre-trial challenges to the admissibility of this evidence were dismissed by the District Court[1] and Court of Appeal.[2] The applicant has appealed to the Court of Appeal against his sentence but seeks leave to appeal direct to this Court against conviction. The submissions on his behalf are directed primarily to the pre-trial decision of the Court of Appeal upholding the admissibility of the detective’s evidence.
[1]R v Biles DC Napier CRI-2013-020-3266, 14 November 2014 (Judge Adeane).
[2]Reid v R [2015] NZCA 175 (Wild, Clifford and Dobson JJ).
The proposed appeal does not meet the stringent test for a leap frog appeal. It would necessarily require considerable attention to be paid to what happened at trial, the evidence which was given, perhaps the addresses of counsel and certainly the directions of the trial Judge. It would be unrealistic to treat it as if it were simply an appeal against the pre-trial ruling.[3]
[3]Compare Peters v R [2006] NZSC 75.
Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent
0