Joblin v The Queen

Case

[2017] NZSC 192

19 December 2017


NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC110/2017
[2017] NZSC 192
BETWEEN

GRAEME ANDREW JOBLIN
Applicant

AND

THE QUEEN
Respondent

Court:

Glazebrook, OʼRegan and Ellen France JJ

Counsel:

Applicant in Person
J E Mildenhall for Respondent

Judgment:

19 December 2017

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.

B           The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Introduction

  1. Mr Joblin was convicted of a range of sexual offending against 10 young male complainants.  He was also convicted of supplying some of the young men with cannabis. 

  2. Mr Joblin seeks leave to appeal out of time[1] against a decision of the Court of Appeal dismissing his appeal against conviction.[2] 

    [1]Mr Joblin’s application was some two months out of time pursuant to r 11 of the Supreme Court Rules 2004.  His explanation for the delay is the difficulties he encountered getting legal assistance with his application.  The Crown does not oppose the application for an extension of time to appeal.

    [2]Joblin v R [2016] NZCA 287 (Stevens, Woodhouse and Wylie JJ).

  3. Mr Joblin’s proposed grounds of appeal relate to issues of disclosure and with the alleged conduct of his trial counsel.

Our assessment

  1. The points Mr Joblin seeks to raise are very fact specific and are essentially those raised in the Court of Appeal and dealt with in its judgment.  Nothing raised by Mr Joblin suggests any error in the Court of Appeal’s analysis.

  2. This means that no point of general of public importance arises.  Nor is there a risk of a miscarriage of justice.

Result

  1. The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.

  2. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 

Solicitors:
Crown Law, Wellington, for Respondent


Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

0

Statutory Material Cited

0