Legal Research
Cases
Jones v The King

Jones v The King

Case [2025] NZCA 338 18 July 2025

Miscarriage of Justice

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA350/2023
[2025] NZCA 338

BETWEEN	ALAN VICTOR JONES Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	13 November 2024 (further submissions received 13 June 2025)
Court:	Courtney, Campbell and Cull JJ
Counsel:	M W Ryan and J G M Seton for Appellant K B Bell for Respondent
Judgment:	18 July 2025 at 2 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The application to set aside the notice of abandonment is granted.

B The application to adduce fresh evidence on appeal is granted.

C The appeal against conviction is allowed.

D The convictions and sentence are set aside.

E We direct that a judgment of acquittal be entered.

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Cull J)

Introduction

Mr Jones was convicted following a jury trial of three charges of money laundering.[1] He was sentenced to 10 months’ home detention and ordered to pay $10,000 in reparation.[2] Mr Jones filed a conviction appeal following his trial but prior to sentencing, and subsequently abandoned the appeal after he was sentenced.
[1]Crimes Act 1961, s 243(2); maximum sentence seven years’ imprisonment.
[2]R v Jones [2024] NZDC 2175 [sentencing notes].
Mr Jones’ co‑accused, Mr Hunter, was subsequently tried separately and acquitted of money laundering charges in respect of the same transactions. This appeal arises as a result of Mr Hunter’s acquittal.
Mr Jones has applied for leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment, adduce fresh evidence and proceed with the appeal against his convictions, on the grounds that trial counsel error and improper jury research resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

Background

Procedural history

Mr Jones was the Chief Financial Officer of an investment company, Constance Capital Ltd (CCL), which received monies into its bank account as a result of a fraudulent business email scam. Mr Jones was charged with three charges of money laundering.
Mr Hunter was the director of CCL. He was separately charged with five charges of money laundering in respect of the same fraudulent scam. The Crown successfully applied for joinder of both sets of charges and the joint trial was scheduled to start in the week beginning 29 May 2023.
In the lead up to the trial, Mr Hunter filed an application for an adjournment of his trial, as he had undergone surgery and was medically unfit to attend Court. Mr Jones also sought an adjournment. On 23 May 2023, a telephone conference took place before Judge Gibson. At that point Mr Jones was unrepresented. The Judge adjourned Mr Hunter’s trial but directed Mr Jones’ trial to continue, advising him to seek legal advice. Mr Jones then instructed Mr Hayes as his trial counsel on 25 May 2023.

The facts

We consider the following background facts, taken from the oral verdict decision of Judge Gibson acquitting Mr Hunter of his charges,[3] best describe the roles of Mr Jones and Mr Hunter, CCL’s investment funding and the fraudulent business email scam. They provide the full factual context against which…

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.

Continue reading Jones v The King

Details

AGLC: Jones v The King [2025] NZCA 338
Case: [2025] NZCA 338
Decision Date: 18 July 2025 at 2 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Jones v The King, Mr Jones, the appellant, was convicted of three charges of money laundering by a jury trial. The Court of Appeal has allowed the appeal against conviction, set aside the convictions and sentence, and directed that a judgment of acquittal be entered. The appeal arose after Mr Jones’ co-accused, Mr Hunter, was acquitted of money laundering charges in respect of the same transactions. The Court found that there was a real risk that the verdicts against Mr Jones were adversely affected by trial counsel errors and that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. The trial counsel’s errors included failing to seek an adjournment of Mr Jones’ trial to ensure that critical evidence was called in his defence and not calling Mr Jones to give evidence despite receiving instructions to do so. The Court also considered the conduct of improper jury research during the trial but found that this did not have a further impact on the appeal outcome.

Orders