Lewis v Police - [2019] NZHC 100

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA AHURIRI ROHE

CRI-2018-441-000034

[2019] NZHC 100

BETWEEN
ZANE KORARI METE LEWIS

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 4 February 2019

Counsel:

R B Philip for Appellant

C C Gullidge for Respondent

Judgment:

7 February 2019

JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J

Introduction

[1] On 8 October 2018, Mr Lewis was convicted of having with him, an offensive weapon, namely a machete, in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse contrary to s 202A(4)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961.1

[2] Mr Lewis accepts the machete was an offensive weapon, that he was in a public place and that, if the machete was with him, he had no lawful authority or reasonable excuse to have it. He appeals his conviction on the ground that the evidence did not demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that he had the machete with him at the relevant time.

1 New Zealand Police v Lewis [2018] NZDC 26989.

LEWIS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2019] NZHC 100 [7 February 2019]

Facts

[3] Mr Lewis was a passenger in a car stopped by the police on 11 May 2018. He was sitting in the front passenger seat. The car was driven by his female cousin. Mr Lewis said that his cousin had picked him up from an address and was driving him home and that he did not know about the contents of the vehicle.

[4] When the police searched the vehicle, they found a flick knife and items of stolen property. The machete was found to be lodged between the front passenger’s seat and the central console of the car. The machete was therefore just a few centimetres to the right of where Mr Lewis was sitting in the car.

[5] When the police commenced searching the vehicle, Mr Lewis first told them they would not find anything of interest in the car. When the police found the machete, Mr Lewis then said to one of the officers: “You guys aren’t very onto it, it took you that long to find it”.

[6] Mr Lewis was charged with having both the machete and the flick knife. Judge Mackintosh found him not guilty of having the flick knife. The appeal therefore only relates to the machete.

District Court decision

[7] In her decision, the Judge concentrated on whether or not Mr Lewis had possession of the machete. The Judge does not appear to have specifically focused on whether or not Mr Lewis had the machete with him. This minor omission was, however, not fatal.

[8] The Judge was satisfied that Mr Lewis’s second comment to the police demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt he had knowledge that the machete was in the vehicle and that, given he was seated next to it, he also had sufficient control over the machete so as to have possession of it.

[9] Mr Lewis was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment. He had already served that time on remand.

Approach on…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Lewis v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2019] NZHC 100
Decision Date: 7 February 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Lewis v Police, the appellant, Zane Korari Mete Lewis, appealed against his conviction of unlawfully having with him an offensive weapon, namely a machete, in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The case was heard by Collins J in the High Court of New Zealand. The central issue was whether the evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that Lewis had the machete with him at the relevant time.

The court examined the elements of the offence under section 202A(4)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961, which require the prosecution to prove that the defendant knew of the presence of the weapon, had physical custody or control of the weapon, and that there was a close physical link and degree of immediate control over the weapon by the defendant. The machete was found lodged between the front passenger's seat and the central console of the car, just a few centimetres to the right of where Lewis was sitting. The Judge concluded that Lewis had knowledge of the machete and sufficient control over it to have possession of it. The appeal focused on whether Lewis had the machete with him, considering the proximity of the weapon and his conduct during the police search.

The court determined that Lewis's comment to police, "You guys aren’t very onto it, it took you that long to find it," indicated that he knew the machete was in the vehicle. Additionally, his initial attempt to deny the presence of anything of interest in the car suggested an assumption of control over the weapon. These factors led the Judge to conclude that all three elements of the charge were satisfied, and therefore, no miscarriage of justice occurred. The appeal was dismissed.

Orders