Rawiri v The King - [2024] NZCA 631

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA189/2024
[2024] NZCA 631

BETWEEN	ELIJAH JAMAL TEUA RAWIRI Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	11 November 2024
Court:	Thomas, Peters and Muir JJ
Counsel:	J Y Yi and H Shin for Appellant R M A McCoubrey and B N Kirkpatrick for Respondent
Judgment:	3 December 2024 at 10.30 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Muir J)

Introduction

Elijah Rawiri appeals his conviction, following a four-day jury trial on six charges relating to aggravated robberies of two inner city Auckland jewellery stores — Gold House and The Hour Glass.[1] His stated ground of appeal is that the jury reached unreasonable verdicts in terms of s 232(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 (the Act). He says that there was no reliable evidence to place him at the scene of either aggravated robbery and, in that context, that no reasonable jury could have found him guilty of the charges to the required criminal standard.
[1]The charges included two of conversion of vehicles used in the respective robberies together with two charges of aggravated robbery, one of aggravated injury and one of aggravated robbery of a civilian.

In so doing he reprises the same essential argument that was advanced by his counsel at the conclusion of the Crown case on an application under s 147 of the Act. The trial judge rejected that application in a results judgment. No reasons have yet been issued.
The Crown case in relation to identity was a circumstantial one. The central issue on appeal is whether, cumulatively, the circumstantial evidence relied on by the Crown established facts capable of supporting the inference that Mr Rawiri was guilty of the crimes alleged.

The aggravated robberies

The first of these, the Gold House robbery, occurred on 19 May 2022 at 4.48 pm. The Crown led evidence identifying three men driving north in a red Mitsubishi Colt vehicle on Parnell Road in the latter part of the afternoon. They drove to Akaroa Street where they parked close to a white Toyota Aqua vehicle. One of the men broke into the Toyota and the two cars then travelled in convoy to Carlton Gore Road, Grafton where they parked on opposite sides of the road. All offenders then drove off in the Toyota vehicle to the Gold House in Victoria Street West. As the manually operated security doors to the premises were opened to let a customer out, the offenders entered and proceeded to smash various display cabinets and take a range of high-end jewellery and handbags.[2] One of the assailants threatened a customer with a tyre iron, telling him to hand over his mobile phone.
[2]Described by the sentencing Judge as having a value of $161,425: R v Rawiri [2024] NZDC 9505 at [5].
The offenders then fled the scene, returning to Carlton Gore Road where one of them attempted to remove the registration plate from…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Rawiri v The King

Details

AGLC: Rawiri v The King [2024] NZCA 631
Case: [2024] NZCA 631
Decision Date: 3 December 2024 at 10.30 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Elijah Jamal Teua Rawiri appeals his conviction, following a jury trial on six charges related to aggravated robberies of two jewellery stores in Auckland. The Crown's case against Rawiri was primarily circumstantial, relying on CCTV footage, clothing evidence, and the use of a red Mitsubishi Colt vehicle in both robberies. Rawiri argues that the jury's verdict was unreasonable under section 232(2)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011, as there was no reliable evidence placing him at the scene of the crimes. The central issue on appeal is whether the cumulative circumstantial evidence presented by the Crown was sufficient to support a reasonable inference of Rawiri's guilt.

The Court of Appeal considered the principles for assessing the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, emphasizing that the appellate court's role is to review, not substitute its view of the evidence. The Court noted that while individual pieces of circumstantial evidence may be slender, it is the cumulative effect that must be considered. The Court found that the Crown's case included several strands of evidence: the connection of Rawiri to the red Mitsubishi vehicle used in both robberies, Rawiri's approved use of the vehicle at times proximate to the robberies, clothing/shoes worn by one of the offenders in each of the robberies and clothing/shoes worn by Rawiri at other times, and the similarities in the execution of both robberies. The Court concluded that, cumulatively, the evidence was capable of supporting a reasonable inference of Rawiri's guilt.

The Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the jury could reasonably have been satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Rawiri was guilty of the crimes charged. The Court highlighted the similarities in the modus operandi of the two robberies and the distinctive clothing and footwear evidence linking Rawiri to the crimes. The Court also noted that Rawiri's credibility was undermined by his explanations of his activities on the days of the robberies, which the jury was entitled to reject.

Orders