Taueki v Police - [2016] NZHC 667

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI-2015-454-14 [2016] NZHC 667

BETWEEN
PHILLIP DEAN TAUEKI

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 4 March 2016

Appearances:

Appellant in person, A Hunt, McKenzie Friend
EM FitzHerbert for Respondent

Judgment:

13 April 2016

JUDGMENT OF TOOGOOD J

This judgment was delivered by me on 13 April 2016 at 11:00 am
Pursuant to Rule 11.5 High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

TAUEKI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2016] NZHC 667 [13 April 2016]

[1] On 6 May 2015, in the District Court at Levin, Phillip Dean Taueki was convicted by Judge WK Hastings on a charge of escaping lawful custody under s 120 of the Crimes Act 1961.1 Judge Hastings found Mr Taueki not guilty of charges of defacing a building and burglary. These charges related to incidents which occurred between 26 and 28 March 2014 at or near a building occupied by the Horowhenua Rowing Club (“the rowing club building”), on the shore of Lake Horowhenua. Following an earlier hearing, the Judge had also acquitted Mr Taueki of four charges arising from events which occurred on 22 March 2014 at Hokio Beach.2

[2] On 22 July 2015, at the sentencing hearing for the escaping charge, Judge Hastings declined Mr Taueki’s application that he be discharged without conviction under ss 106 and 107 of the Sentencing Act 2002.3 The Judge assessed the gravity of the offending as moderate and convicted and discharged Mr Taueki. He declined to make an order in favour of Mr Taueki under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967.

[3] Mr Taueki appeals against the conviction and the Judge’s costs decision. He abandoned his appeal against the sentence. The remaining issues on appeal are:

(a) Whether the Judge erred in his assessment of the evidence to such an extent that a miscarriage of justice has occurred and the conviction should be set aside.4

(b) Whether the Judge was right to refuse to make a costs order in

Mr Taueki’s favour in relation to his acquittals and the conviction.5

The background and findings of fact

[4] The hearing of the charges against Mr Taueki took place over six days between 12 and 19 February 2015. On 6 May 2015, Judge Hastings delivered a
carefully reasoned decision. Mr Taueki had appeared in person at the hearing but he

1      New Zealand Police v Taueki [2015] NZDC 7815.
2      New Zealand Police v Taueki [2015] NZDC 14034 at [17], the sentencing decision, where the Judge summarised the charges as wilful damage, male assaults female and two charges of assault with a weapon.
3 At [16].
4      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 232(2)(b) and (4).
5      Sections 271 and 274.

was supported by a McKenzie Friend, Ms Hunt. An experienced criminal lawyer, Mr Simon Hewson, had been appointed by Judge Hastings to assist the Court. The Judge said that Mr Hewson was of great assistance to him in refining the issues, researching the law, and ensuring the hearing went smoothly.

[5] The factual…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Taueki v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] NZHC 667
Decision Date: 13 April 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Phillip Dean Taueki appealed against his conviction for escaping lawful custody and the District Court's refusal to award him costs. The appeal raised two primary issues: first, whether the Judge erred in his assessment of the evidence to such an extent that a miscarriage of justice occurred, and second, whether the Judge was right to refuse to make a costs order in Taueki's favour in relation to his acquittals and conviction. Taueki argued that he was not in lawful custody, did not believe he was in custody, and the Judge made erroneous factual findings. He also claimed the Judge relied on hearsay evidence to establish his knowledge that he was under arrest. The High Court found that the Judge was well-placed to make credibility findings and that there was sufficient evidence to justify the conviction. The Court concluded that no miscarriage of justice occurred in the conviction. Regarding the costs appeal, the Court found that Judge Hastings correctly applied the criteria for awarding costs under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 and made no error in his approach. The Court was satisfied that no miscarriage of justice occurred in the costs decision.

The Court dismissed the appeals against conviction and the costs decisions. The conviction stood, and the costs award was upheld. The Court found no grounds to overturn the District Court's judgment on either the conviction or the costs decision. The outcome affirmed the District Court's findings and the Judge's exercise of discretion in relation to costs.

Orders