Legal Research
Cases
R (SC 1/2019) v The Queen

R (SC 1/2019) v The Queen

Case [2019] NZSC 10 21 February 2019

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

NOTE: ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF APPELLANT PURSUANT TO S 200 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY SS 203 and 204 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. SEE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 1/2019
[2019] NZSC 10

BETWEEN	R (SC 1/2019) Applicant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Court:	William Young, Glazebrook and O’Regan JJ
Counsel:	N P Chisnall for Applicant J E L Curruthers for Respondent
Judgment:	21 February 2019

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for leave to appeal is granted (R (CA158/2018) v R [2018] NZCA 529.

BThe approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.

____________________________________________________________________

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

Details

AGLC: R (SC 1/2019) v The Queen [2019] NZSC 10
Case: [2019] NZSC 10
Decision Date: 21 February 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, referred to as R, sought leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal dismissing their appeal against their conviction and sentence. The appeal pertained to charges related to serious criminal activity, the specifics of which are not disclosed due to legal restrictions on publication of certain details. The Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the Court of Appeal had erred in dismissing R's appeal. The primary legal issue was whether the Court of Appeal correctly upheld the conviction and sentence imposed on R. This required scrutiny of the Court of Appeal's reasoning, the evidence presented, and the application of legal principles to the facts of the case.

The Supreme Court examined the comprehensive reasoning provided by the Court of Appeal and considered whether any errors of law or fact warranted overturning the decision. The Court evaluated whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and whether the sentence was appropriate. The Court also considered whether any procedural errors during the trial or appeal process could have affected the outcome. Ultimately, the Supreme Court found no basis to overturn the Court of Appeal's decision, affirming that the appeal was correctly dismissed. The Court upheld the conviction and sentence, finding no grounds for interference.

In light of the above, the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal but did not allow the appeal itself to proceed. This decision means that the conviction and sentence remain in place, and R's appeal was not successful in altering the outcome. The Court's judgment was based on a thorough analysis of the legal and factual issues presented in the case, confirming the correctness of the Court of Appeal's decision.

Orders