Jule Patrick Burns v The Queen

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
SC 65/2007
[2008] NZSC 13
JULE PATRICK BURNS
v
THE QUEEN
Court:McGrath, Anderson and Wilson JJ
Counsel:D J Taffs for Applicant

F E Guy Kidd for Crown

Judgment:5 March 2008

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
REASONS
[1]       Having unsuccessfully appealed to the Court of Appeal against his conviction on a charge of murder, the applicant seeks leave to appeal to this Court on two grounds.
[2]       First, the applicant claims, the verdict was unreasonable or cannot be supported by the evidence. The Court of Appeal concluded however that there was a “more than adequate” evidential basis for the verdict, including an alleged admission by the applicant. The submissions for the applicant simply restate those made to the Court of Appeal. They go no way to demonstrating that that Court erred in its conclusion.
[3]       Secondly, the applicant contends that DNA evidence linking him to the victim was wrongly admitted. There are major difficulties in the way of this submission. Defence counsel at trial gave evidence to the Court of Appeal that the applicant had consistently wanted the Police to have a DNA sample from him to clarify whether the prostitute he admitted to having sex with that evening was the deceased. He was able to derive some support from the result of the DNA analysis by portraying himself as co-operating with the Police.
[4]       Even if the applicant had refused a second sample, after the wrong consent form had been used when the first sample was obtained, the Police would in all probability have obtained a sample compulsorily.
[5]       In reality, the applicant is asking this Court to entertain a second general appeal. As has been made clear in decisions such as Mankelow v R [2007] NZSC 57, the Court will not do so unless it appears that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, which is not the position here.
[6]       The application does not raise any question of general or public importance.
[7]       Having failed to meet any of the criteria prescribed in s 13(2) of the Supreme Court Act 2003, the application is therefore dismissed.
Solicitors:
Crown Law, Wellington

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jule Patrick Burns has brought an appeal to the Supreme Court of New Zealand against his conviction for murder. The appeal follows an unsuccessful attempt to overturn the conviction in the Court of Appeal. The applicant raises two grounds for appeal, the first being that the verdict was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. The second ground is that DNA evidence linking him to the victim was wrongly admitted. Counsel for the applicant presented arguments that were largely a repetition of those made to the Court of Appeal, which did not demonstrate any error in the Court of Appeal's reasoning. The court found that there was ample evidence to support the verdict, including an admission by the applicant. Regarding the DNA evidence, the court noted that the applicant had cooperated with the police in obtaining a DNA sample and that any issue with the consent form used would likely not have prevented a compulsory sample being obtained. The court concluded that the application did not meet the criteria for leave to appeal, as it did not appear that a miscarriage of justice had occurred, nor did it raise any question of general or public importance.

The Supreme Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal, stating that the applicant had not demonstrated any error by the Court of Appeal or shown that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. The court emphasized that it would not entertain a second general appeal unless such a miscarriage was evident. The applicant's arguments were found to be insufficient to meet the criteria set out in the Supreme Court Act 2003, leading to the dismissal of the application.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established