Lethbridge v Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CRI-2018-485-45

[2018] NZHC 2106

TAYLOR OWEN JAYDEN LETHBRIDGE

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Hearing: 7 August 2018

Appearances:

V E Thursby for the Appellant

A R van Echten for the Respondent

Judgment:

16 August 2018

RESULTS JUDGMENT OF CULL J

[1] Mr Lethbridge seeks leave to appeal against a pre-trial ruling, which held that a police search of Mr Lethbridge’s property was lawful and the evidence seized during the search was admissible.1

[2] This results judgment is being issued urgently, as this Court has just been notified that the District Court has scheduled a Judge-alone trial for this matter for next Monday, 20 August 2018.

Result

[3]Leave to appeal is granted.

1 New Zealand Police v Lethbridge [2018] NZDC 13114.

LETHBRIDGE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 2106 [16 August 2018]

[4]The appeal is allowed.

[5] The evidence obtained from the warrantless search was unlawful and is inadmissible under s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

[6]Reasons will follow as soon as practicable.

Cull J

Solicitors:
Luke Cunningham & Clere, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand heard an appeal by Taylor Owen Jayden Lethbridge against a decision of the District Court, which held that a search conducted by the New Zealand Police of Lethbridge's property was lawful and that the evidence obtained during the search was admissible. Lethbridge sought leave to appeal the ruling, which was granted, and the appeal was subsequently allowed. The central legal issue in this case was whether the evidence obtained from a warrantless search of Lethbridge's property was lawful and admissible under Section 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

The court found that the evidence obtained from the warrantless search was unlawful and, therefore, inadmissible. The decision of the District Court was overturned, and the appeal was allowed. The reasoning behind the court's decision will be provided in due course. The urgency of this ruling is underscored by the fact that the District Court has scheduled a Judge-alone trial for the matter, set to begin on 20 August 2018.

The final outcome of this appeal is that the evidence obtained from the warrantless search of Lethbridge's property is deemed unlawful and inadmissible under Section 30 of the Evidence Act 2006. This decision has significant implications for the ongoing criminal proceedings against Lethbridge, as it nullifies the admissibility of the evidence obtained during the warrantless search. The court's ruling underscores the importance of adhering to legal procedures when conducting searches and obtaining evidence, and it serves as a reminder of the potential consequences of unlawful actions by law enforcement agencies.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established