K v Police HC Napier CRI-2007-441-23

[2007] NZHC 1899

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

CRI-2007-441-23

K

Appellant

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         22 June 2007

Appearances: Mr B Webby for Appellant

Mrs J Rielly for Respondent

Judgment:      22 June 2007

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J [on appeal against refusal to grant bail]

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Napier

Counsel:

Mr W Webby, Napier

K V NZ POLICE HC NAP CRI-2007-441-23  22 June 2007

[1]      Mr K   appeals against refusal of bail in the District Court.

[2]      The matter has a somewhat unusual history.   Mr K   was arrested on or about 27 April 2007 following an incident in which he is said to have taken a motor vehicle and other property belonging to his partner or former partner.     He was brought before the Justices of the Peace on Saturday 28 April 2007.     He was represented by counsel at that time and applied for bail.   The Justices declined that application and in doing so gave the following as their reasons:

On  hearing  both  your  submissions  I  have  decided  that  Matthew  David K   you will be remanded in custody until Wednesday 2nd  May 2007 to Napier District Court at 10 am.

[3]      Thereafter  Mr  K    appeared  in  the  District  Court  on  a  number  of occasions.   The last of these was on 6 June 2007, when he was remanded in custody to a defended hearing on 24 July 2007.   No reasons were given by the Judge in the District Court on 6 June 2007 for his decision to remand Mr K   in custody.

[4]      Mr Webby advised me from the bar today that the Judge in fact declined to hear a bail application on the basis that there had been no change in Mr K  ’s circumstances since the matter was last before the Justices.

[5]      The difficulty that I have is that I have no way of knowing the basis upon which the Justices decided to refuse Mr K   bail.   Neither do I have any reasons from the District Court regarding its decision to remand Mr K   in custody to the date of the defended hearing.

[6]      During the hearing today I have advised Mr Webby that he needs to make a fresh application to the District Court for bail.   Given the fact that no reasons were originally given by the Justices, I anticipate that the Judge who hears the application will deliver a reasoned decision determining the application.   The danger that I see, if the matter is allowed to drift until 24 July, is that Mr K   may well end up serving more time in custody than will be the case in the event that he is convicted at the defended hearing.

[7]      For these reasons the appeal is dismissed but I invite Mr K   to apply again for bail in the District Court.

Lang J