K v Police HC Palmerston North CRI-2009-454-46

[2009] NZHC 2302

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

CRI-2009-454-46

K

Appellant

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         15 December 2009

Appearances: No appearance for Appellant

ASA Hall for Respondent

Judgment:      15 December 2009

ORAL JUDGMENT OF MACKENZIE J

[1]      This is an appeal against a sentence of 40 hours community work which was imposed in the District Court on 2 November 2009 on a charge of assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty and a further count of possession of cannabis. Concurrent sentences of 40 hours community work were imposed on each of those counts.

[2]      The appellant had been self represented in the District Court on sentencing and the Judge’s sentencing notes record that at the conclusion of the sentencing the appellant  raised  with  the  Judge  the  question  of  whether  there  should  be  some

reduction of the community work time for the time that he has spent in jail when first

K V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC PMN CRI-2009-454-46  15 December 2009

arrested, which was apparently something of the order of a day.  The Judge noted that the 40 hours that he had imposed was the minimum and therefore was no basis for a further reduction.

[3]      The appellant then filed a notice of appeal in which the grounds for the appeal were stated as “I couldn’t get time off because 40 hours was the lowest I could be sentenced but did consider it.  But 40 hours was the lowest he could go.  I spent one and a half days in police custody for false arrest but couldn’t get lower than 40, 40 is the minimum”.

[4]      When the appeal was called today there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant.  There had been no explanation of why there would not be an appearance and counsel for the respondent is not aware of any reason for non appearance and has had no communication from the appellant.

[5]      In all the circumstances I consider the appropriate course is to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.  I do that both because there is no sufficient basis for me to adjourn the matter for a further opportunity for the appellant to be heard and also because on the face of it the matter raised in respect of the appeal does not provide a substantive ground for interfering with the sentence which was, as the Judge noted, at the lowest end for the sentence which the Judge had considered appropriate.

[6]      The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

“A D MacKenzie J”

Solicitors:         Appellant in person, Matthew Simon K  , 46 Kelvin Grove Road, Palmerston

North

Crown Solicitor, Palmerston North for Respondent