R v Poasa

[2025] NZHC 2869

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHAKATŪ ROHE

CRI-2023-042-000689

[2025] NZHC 2869

THE KING

v

ISAMAELI POASA

Hearing:	On the Papers
Counsel:	Applicant Self-represented
Judgment:	30 September 2025

JUDGMENT OF CHURCHMAN J

Background

[1]        Mr Poasa (the Applicant) is scheduled to stand trial in a Judge alone trial to commence on 6 October 2025.

[2]        The trial has a long procedural history and relates to events which are said to have occurred in May 2023. Multiple earlier fixture dates have been scheduled and for various reasons have not proceeded. The fixture for 6 October 2025 is a priority fixture.

[3]        Judge Snell is  the  assigned  Judge  for  the  trial.  He  issued  a  minute  on 24 September 2025 noting that the applicant sought an adjournment of the trial. After

R v POASA [2025] NZHC 2869 [30 September 2025]

analysing the history of the matter and the submissions made by the applicant he refused the application for adjournment.1

[4]        The minute concluded by saying that if the applicant had any genuine pre-trial applications, they were to be filed in writing by 4 pm on Tuesday 30 September 2025 and will be dealt with on the morning of 6 October prior to commencement of trial.

[5]        The minute also noted that Mr Vesty, a senior defence counsel from Nelson, remained available to represent Mr Poasa at the trial.

The application

[6]        The applicant has filed a document in the High Court dated 30 September 2025 and called “Interlocutory application without notice”. It is claimed to be filed in accordance with r 7.19 of the High Court Rules 2016 (HCR). It seeks an order granting leave to appeal the ruling of Judge Snell dated 24 September 2025 and an order staying the District Court trial until the High Court determines the appeal.

[7]        Later in the document, the applicant makes reference to reliance on s 296 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 which provides for a defendant in criminal proceedings, with leave of the first appeal Court to appeal on the question of law against a ruling by the trial Court.

[8]Section 296(3) provides:

(a)The question of law in a first appeal under this sub-part must arise —

(i)in proceedings that relate to or follow the determination of the charge; or

(ii)In a determination of a charge including without limitation, a conviction,  and acquittal,  the dismissal  of the charge under   s 147, or a stay of prosecution.

1      CRI-2023-042-689 R v Poasa minute of Judge A J S Snell 24 September 2025.

[9]        Given that the trial has not yet concluded and there has been no determination of any charge, s 296 is not applicable. The applicant also refers to ss 133, 134, 146 and 147 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Section 133 relates to the amendment of a charge. Judge Snell’s minute did not involve amending a charge.

[10]      Section 134 relates to the procedure involved if a charge is amended before the trail. This procedure is not relevant as Judge Snell, in his minute, did not amend a charge. Section 146 relates to the withdrawal of a charge and s 147 relates to dismissal of a charge. Again, Judge Snell’s minute did not proport to direct a withdrawal of a charge of the dismissal of a charge.

Analysis

[11]      Nothing in the Criminal Procedure Act authorises the type of application made by the applicant.

[12]      The High Court rule referred to by the applicant governs civil proceedings rather than criminal proceedings.

[13]      Judge Snell’s minute simply refused a last minute application for an adjournment. On the facts and reasons set out in his minute, that was something that Judge Snell was entitled to do.

Outcome

[14]      Accordingly, the application is dismissed. The trial will proceed as scheduled on 6 October 2025.

Churchman J