BETWEEN VASA JOHNSTON Applicant AND THE KING Respondent

[2024] NZSC 154

NOTE: PUBLICATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY PURSUANT TO S 19(1) OF THE BAIL ACT 2000. SEE

 NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS  OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

 NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI O AOTEAROA

 SC 115/2024
 [2024] NZSC 154

BETWEEN	VASA JOHNSTON Applicant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Court:	Glazebrook and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	Applicant in Person A J Ewing for Respondent
Judgment:	8 November 2024

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. After a jury trial, Mr Johnston was found guilty of the sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection of a 14‑year‑old victim.

2. He seeks leave to appeal against a Court of Appeal decision denying his application for bail pending appeal.[1] 

Court of Appeal decision

[1]Johnston v R [2024] NZCA 505 (Collins, Brewer and Osborne JJ).

1. In its decision denying Mr Johnston’s application for bail, the Court of Appeal noted that Mr Johnston had not shown any change in circumstances with regard to the fresh application for bail to the Court.[2]  The Court also did not consider his personal circumstances to be exceptional.[3]  In addition, the Court of Appeal said that nothing at that stage indicated that Mr Johnston’s grounds of appeal are particularly strong.[4] 

   [2]At [6]–[7] referring to s 54(2)(c) of the Bail Act 2000.

   [3]At [8].

   [4]At [9].

2. In all the circumstances, and having regard to s 14(3) of the Bail Act 2000, the Court of Appeal was not satisfied that the overall interests of justice required the application for bail to be granted.

Grounds of the application

1. Mr Johnston submits that the Court of Appeal erred in its preliminary assessment of the merits of his appeal. 

2. Mr Johnston seeks an oral hearing of his leave application.

Our assessment

1. The application relates to the particular circumstances of Mr Johnston’s case.  No issue of principle arises.  Further, nothing raised by Mr Johnston suggests that the decision of the Court of Appeal may have been in error.  In particular nothing raised suggests that the merits of his conviction appeal are so compelling that bail ought to have been granted.  It is therefore not in the interests of justice to grant his application for leave.[5]

   [5]Senior Courts Act 2016, s 74(1).

2. In the circumstances we do not consider the Court would be assisted by an oral hearing of the application.

Result

1. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Solicitors:
Te Tari Ture o te Karauna | Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent