Griffin v The the King

[2022] NZHC 2903

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CRI 2022-485-40

[2022] NZHC 2903

UNDER

Part 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011

IN THE MATTER OF

a first appeal against conviction

BETWEEN

SAMUEL GRIFFIN

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

On the papers
Counsel:	H G de Groot and E Blincoe for Appellant K L Kensington for Respondent
Judgment:	7 November 2022

JUDGMENT OF MALLON J (No 3)

[1]    The appellant was convicted on a charge of strangulation1 and a charge of assault of a person in a family relationship2 following a judge alone trial in the District Court.3 He appealed these convictions to the High Court on the basis that a miscarriage of justice had occurred.

[2]    In my judgment of 12 September 20224 I allowed the appeal against conviction on the strangulation charge and quashed the conviction on that charge.5 I dismissed

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 189A(b).

2      Section 194A.

3      R v Griffin [2021] NZDC 3533 [Judge I G Mill]. He was discharged on another charge of assault of a person in a family relationship. He was subsequently sentenced to one year’s supervision and 80 hours of community work.

4      Griffin v R [2022] NZHC 2325.

5      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 233(2).

GRIFFIN v R [2022] NZHC 2903 [7 November 2022]

the appeal against the remaining assault charge.6 I requested submissions on the appropriate course for sentencing on the remaining assault charge in light of the strangulation charge having been quashed.7

[3]    Following receipt of those submissions, in my judgment of 17 October 2022 I directed an acquittal on the strangulation charge and indicated that I preferred the appellant’s submission that he should be convicted and discharged on the assault charge and a remittal back to the District Court avoided. The Crown was directed to further respond.

[4]    The Crown responded on 27 October 2022 advising that it did not oppose the proposed course of action. Accordingly, the sentence of supervision and community work imposed in the District Court is set aside and Mr Griffin is convicted and discharged on the assault charge.8

Mallon J

6      Griffin v R, above n 4, at [79].

7      At [80]–[81].

8      Criminal Procedure Act, s 236(2)(b).