R v Armstrong

In the case of R v Armstrong, the appellant was convicted in the Auckland District Court of indecent assault, a charge under the Crimes Act 1961. The appellant appealed against his conviction and sentence, arguing that the trial judge misdirected the jury on the elements of the offence of indecent assault and failed to present the defence case fairly. Additionally, it was argued that the trial proceeded under the wrong section of the Crimes Act 1961, as the new section 134 did not come into effect until after the alleged offending occurred. The appellant also submitted that the sentence was excessive and that he should have been discharged without conviction.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had indeed misdirected the jury in relation to the elements of the offence of indecent assault, and that the confusion surrounding the applicable section of the Crimes Act 1961 had further contributed to the miscarriage of justice. The Court quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial, while also noting that the sentence appeal was rendered moot due to the quashing of the conviction.

An order was made prohibiting publication of the reasons for judgment in the news media or on the internet or in any other publicly accessible database until final disposition of the new trial. Publication in a law report or a law digest was, however, permitted.