McIntyre v R

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA578/2017
[2017] NZCA 579

BETWEEN	RUARANGI WAITAI MCINTYRE Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Court:

Miller, Brown and Clifford JJ

Counsel:

E P Priest for Appellant
I R Murray for Respondent

Judgment:

(On the papers)

11 December 2017 at 10.00 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe appeal is allowed.
BThe conviction for being an accessory after the fact to murder is quashed.
CThere is no order for a retrial.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Brown J)

Mr McIntyre pleaded guilty to a charge of accessory after the fact to murder. The alleged primary offender defended the murder charge, claiming self-defence,

and was acquitted. Following that acquittal, Mr McIntyre appeals his conviction.[1]

[1]Mr McIntyre’s notice of appeal was filed some nine days out of time as a result. The necessary extension of time was granted by Brown J: McIntyre v R CA578/2017, 24 November 2017 (Minute of Brown J).

To succeed on a charge of accessory after the fact to another crime the Crown must prove the substantive crime was committed, although it is not necessary that a person be convicted of that substantive crime. In the circumstances, the Crown conceded that the successful self-defence claim by the alleged primary offender has the consequence that there was no murder. Accordingly, Mr McIntyre cannot be an accessory to a murder that did not occur.
We accept the Crown’s submission that this case falls within the second category of exceptional circumstances in R v Le Page[2] and Watts v R[3] so as to permit a successful conviction appeal following a plea of guilty. That is where a miscarriage of justice arises because, on the admitted facts, the appellant could not in law have been convicted of the offence charged. Consequently, notwithstanding the guilty plea, we allow Mr McIntyre’s appeal against his conviction on the charge of accessory after the fact to murder.

Result

[2]R v Le Page [2005] 2 NZLR 845 at [18].

[3]Watts v R [2011] NZCA 41 at [20(b)].

The appeal is allowed.
The conviction for being an accessory after the fact to murder is quashed.
There is no order for a retrial.

Solicitors:
Blackstone Chambers, Auckland for Appellant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, the case of Ruarrangi Waitai McIntyre, the appellant, against The Queen, the respondent, was heard. The appeal was filed by Mr. McIntyre, who had pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to a murder charge. The primary offender in the murder case claimed self-defence and was acquitted. Mr. McIntyre subsequently appealed his conviction. The appeal was heard by Miller, Brown, and Clifford JJ, with counsel for the appellant and the respondent being E P Priest and I R Murray, respectively. The judgment was delivered on the papers on 11 December 2017.

The legal issues before the court were whether the Crown could successfully prosecute Mr. McIntyre for accessory after the fact to a murder that the alleged primary offender was acquitted of committing, and whether the appeal could be allowed despite Mr. McIntyre's guilty plea. The court needed to determine if the successful self-defence claim by the primary offender meant there was no murder, and if Mr. McIntyre could be considered an accessory to a non-existent crime. Furthermore, the court had to consider the exceptional circumstances under which an appeal against a conviction following a guilty plea could be allowed.

The court held that the successful self-defence claim by the primary offender meant there was no murder, and therefore, Mr. McIntyre could not be an accessory to a non-existent crime. The Crown conceded that, on the admitted facts, Mr. McIntyre could not in law have been convicted of the offence charged. The court accepted the Crown's submission that the case fell within the second category of exceptional circumstances as set out in R v Le Page and Watts v R, which permit a successful conviction appeal following a plea of guilty where a miscarriage of justice arises. Consequently, the court allowed Mr. McIntyre's appeal against his conviction on the charge of accessory after the fact to murder, quashed the conviction, and made no order for a retrial.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established