JIMMY REX PARKER AND THE KING - [2024] NZHC 2918

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2024-463-0071

CRI-2024-463-0086 [2024] NZHC 2918

BETWEEN
JIMMY REX PARKER

Applicant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: On the papers

Appearances:

Applicant in person

E S R O’Brien for respondent

Date of judgment:

8 October 2024

JUDGMENT OF JAGOSE J

This judgment was delivered by me on 8 October 2024 at 4.00pm.

………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
Pollett Legal, Tauranga

Copy to:
Applicant

PARKER v R [2024] NZHC 2918 [8 October 2024]

[1] Mr Parker seeks extensions of time to appeal his January and March 2021 convictions,1 respectively for wilful damage and intimidation.2

Background

[2] Appeals are to be filed within 20 working days after sentence, unless time to appeal is extended.3 The appeals were filed in June 2024. Moore J directed Mr Parker file applications for extension of time and affidavit(s) in support.4 The applications and appeals were allocated for my hearing on 17 September 2024.

[3]I explained in a subsequent minute:5

… Mr Parker has filed nothing to explain, as Moore J directed:6

… why Mr Parker did not file his appeal within the 20 working days limit and also why it has taken approximately three years for him to file his notices of general appeal.

The only apparently relevant aspects of Mr Parker’s filed affidavit sworn 5 August 2024 is his advice:
The witness kept the [issue] going for years until he was taken to court and I was [a]warded a restraining order for my and my family’s safety.2022 - 2023 also listed as a hate crime by police.

accompanied by a copy of the restraining order, and he “had a head injury which took years to get past which also [a]ffected [his] mental health”, accompanied by a photograph of the top of his head with a handwritten indication of the location of a “head injury” at his hairline. His 24 August 2024 application for an extension of time states “I was injured by the witness and suffered four years” and “On going harassment by the witness affecting my mental health”. Otherwise both affidavit and application repeat his grounds for appeal.

On that sparse basis, Mr Parker almost certainly would not be granted any extension of time within which to appeal. As Moore J already had indicated:7
It is impossible for any appellate court to review Mr Parker’s explanations for lateness and delay without a more detailed description of what his infirmities were and how they operated to

1      New Zealand Police v Parker [2021] NZDC 3403 (the wilful damage conviction); New Zealand Police v Parker [2021] NZDC 26180 (the intimidation conviction).
2      Summary Offences Act 1981, ss 11 (wilful damage) and 21 (intimidation).
3      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 231.
4      Parker v New Zealand Police CRI-2024-463-0071 HC Rotorua, 26 July 2024 (Minute of Moore J).
5      Parker v New Zealand Police CRI-2024-463-0071/0086 HC Rotorua, 13 September 2024 (Minute of Jagose J), at [4]–[10].
6      Minute of Moore J, above n…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read JIMMY REX PARKER AND THE KING and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2024] NZHC 2918
Decision Date: 8 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Jimmy Rex Parker and The King involves Mr. Parker's applications for extensions of time to appeal his convictions for wilful damage and intimidation, which were handed down in January and March 2021. The High Court of New Zealand, Rotorua Registry, heard the matter on the papers. The central legal issues were whether Mr. Parker's significant delay in filing his appeals, and the lack of adequate explanation for that delay, warranted an extension of time under the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.

The court considered whether the delay was adequately explained and whether there were compelling reasons to extend time. Relevant factors included the seriousness of the charges, the strength of the proposed appeal, the impact on others, and prejudice to the Crown. The court emphasised the importance of the general interest in finality of litigation, balanced against the particular interest claimed by the applicant. Mr. Parker's submissions, though detailed, were based largely on assertions and lacked sufficient evidence to support his claims. The court found that Mr. Parker's reasons for the delay were inadequately explained and did not present compelling reasons for extending the time to appeal.

The court dismissed Mr. Parker's applications for extensions of time. The appeals, which were already significantly overdue, would not be heard, and the convictions would stand. This decision underscores the importance of timely filing of appeals and the need for applicants to provide adequate evidence to support their applications for extensions of time.

Orders