R v Greer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND MASTERTON REGISTRY

CRI-2012-035-991 [2014] NZHC 2366

THE QUEEN

v

ALLAN IVO GREER

Hearing:
26 September 2014

(Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:

I R Murray for Crown
Defendant in person

Judgment:

26 September 2014

ORAL JUDGMENT OF MACKENZIE J

[1] Before I begin the sentencing, I need to address several matters that Mr Greer has raised. He has recently filed a 181 page document in which he has made a number of applications. They have not been made in proper form, but I deal with them to the extent necessary.

[2] The first is an application that I recuse myself from dealing further with this case. Mr Greer asserts that I am disqualified by having demonstrated bias against him, first in a bail appeal which I heard on an unrelated matter in 2010, which he asserts has led me to conduct his trial in a manner adverse to him.

[3] As the trial Judge, I should sentence Mr Greer unless there are good grounds to recuse myself. I am satisfied that none of the many matters raised by him justify recusal. The way I conducted the trial can potentially be raised on an appeal against
conviction. I advised Mr Greer of that in a minute on 16 May 2014, and nothing in

R v GREER [2014] NZHC 2366 [26 September 2014]

his further papers filed causes me to alter my view that no grounds for recusal are made out.

[4] The application for recusal is accordingly dismissed.

[5] Mr Greer has also made a renewed application for bail. Bail is out of the question. That application is dismissed.

[6] Mr Greer has also renewed an application for discharge. Because the trial proceeded to jury verdicts, I have no power to discharge, or to declare a mistrial as Mr Greer requests. As I have said, any issues as to the conduct of the trial are a matter for appeal, not for this Court.

[7] Mr Greer has also made requests for documents from the Court file. I addressed that request in my minute of 10 July 2014. I am not prepared to make any further order at this stage.

[8] Mr Greer has also made application for an adjournment. This sentencing has already been delayed. There is no basis for any further delay. That application is refused.

[9] I will now proceed with the sentencing.

“A D MacKenzie J”

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Greer involved the defendant, Allan Ivo Greer, who was before the High Court of New Zealand, Masterton Registry, for sentencing. Greer had been convicted by a jury and was facing sentencing for his crimes. The defendant, appearing in person, had submitted various applications including a request for the judge to recuse himself, an application for bail, a request for discharge, requests for documents from the court file, and an application for an adjournment. The Crown was represented by I R Murray.

The legal issues before the court included whether the judge should recuse himself from the case due to alleged bias, the appropriateness of granting bail, the validity of discharging the defendant, the necessity of providing specific documents from the court file, and the justification for an adjournment of the sentencing. The court needed to determine the validity of each application and decide whether to grant any of them.

The court dismissed all applications made by Greer. The judge found no grounds for recusal, stating that the conduct of the trial could be subject to appeal rather than being grounds for recusal. Bail was dismissed as not applicable after the trial had concluded with jury verdicts. The application for discharge was also dismissed as the court had no power to discharge or declare a mistrial. Requests for documents from the court file were addressed in a previous minute, and no further orders were made at that stage. Finally, the application for an adjournment was refused as the sentencing had already been delayed and there was no basis for further delay.

The court proceeded with sentencing, dismissing all applications made by Greer and moving forward with the sentencing process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established