Somerville v Police

[2015] NZCA 499

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA398/2015
[2015] NZCA 499

BETWEEN	CAROL TUI SOMERVILLE Applicant
AND	NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Court:

Miller, Heath and Lang JJ

Counsel:

Applicant in Person
J E L Carruthers for Respondent

Judgment:

(On the papers)

22 October 2015 at 10:00 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Miller J)

1. Ms Somerville seeks leave to bring a second appeal against her conviction in the District Court on one charge of assault.[1] 

   [1]New Zealand Police v [Somerville] DC Christchurch CRI-2014-009-008726, 11 November 2014.

2. The allegation was that she spat at a young man who she thought had been talking rudely about her with his friend.  She admitted following them and confronting them at a mall but denied spitting.  The prosecution called the victim, his friend, and a painter who intervened in the incident.  All three said they saw her spit at the victim.  Ms Somerville gave evidence in which she accepted that she had followed the victim and his friend and confronted them.

3. Dunningham J dismissed an appeal against conviction, holding relevantly that there was ample evidence on which the Judge was entitled to find that the act of spitting had occurred as alleged.[2] 

   [2]Somerville v New Zealand Police [2015] NZHC 771.

4. Ms Somerville says that there has been a miscarriage of justice and that the appeal involves a matter of general or public importance because the public should know that trials are fair and just.  She refers to various particulars of the evidence in support of a contention that the witnesses for the prosecution were not credible.

5. None of these allegations are matters of general or public importance, and we do not accept that they give rise to a miscarriage of justice.[3] 

   [3]Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 237.

6. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent