Keefe v The Queen

The case of Keefe v The Queen involved Delwyn Ismalia Keefe, who had been sentenced to imprisonment for drug-related offences. Keefe appealed her sentence and subsequently applied for bail pending the outcome of that appeal. The Court of Appeal of New Zealand considered the application, which was made under section 70 of the Bail Act 2000. The key legal issue was whether bail should be granted to Keefe while her appeal was being determined. The Court had to balance the interests of justice with the statutory presumption against granting bail pending appeal.

The Court assessed the likelihood of success of Keefe's appeal and the potential injustice of denying her bail. Keefe argued that the appeal had a strong basis, particularly concerning the assessment of her role in the cannabis operation and the appropriateness of her sentence. However, the Court noted that the appeal would need to address the Crown's argument that the new evidence was not sufficiently fresh and could have been presented earlier. Additionally, the Court considered the possibility that home detention might have been an available sentencing option, which could impact the appeal's outcome. The Court concluded that the appeal grounds did not appear compelling enough to warrant bail, considering the statutory presumption against it. The Court also noted that the appeal should be heard as early as possible to minimize the time Keefe would spend in custody.

The Court of Appeal decided to decline the bail application. The appeal was scheduled to be heard on specific dates in June and July 2010, with the Court urging counsel to agree on a truncated timetable for filing submissions if the appeal was set down in June. The Court's decision was based on the balance of probabilities and the statutory presumption against granting bail pending appeal. The appeal was to be heard in Wellington or Auckland, and the Registrar was to contact counsel to finalize the hearing dates.