The Queen v WEN Hui Cui - [2006] NZCA 275

In the Court Of Appeal of New Zealand

CA333/05

THE QUEEN

WEN HUI CUI

Hearing:20 June 2006

Court:William Young P, Wild and Heath JJ
Appearances: A Shaw and C P Comeskey for Appellant
B J Horsley and K E Salmond for Respondent

Judgment:28 September 2006 at 2.15 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A Leave to appeal out of time is granted.

B The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

C The appeal against sentence is dismissed.
___________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Heath J)

Table of Contents

Para No

Introduction  [1]
The issues  [4]
The events of the night of 13 April 2003  [10]
Structure of summing up  [25]
Analysis of grounds of conviction appeal  [40]
The Crown’s closing on intoxication  [40]
Intoxication/attempted murder  [55]
Ought the Judge to have commented on Dr Jansen’s evidence?  [58]
Inter-relationship between intoxication and provocation directions                  [65]
Admissibility issues - photographs  [80]
The sentence appeal  [94]
Result  [122]

Introduction

Following a trial before Potter J and a jury in the High Court at Auckland, Wen Hui Cui was convicted on two counts of murder and one of attempted murder. The charges arose out of an incident that occurred on the night of Sunday 13 April 2003 at Auckland.
Mr Cui admitted that he fatally stabbed his former girlfriend, Bin Lin and a man called Ge Li, who was an acquaintance of Ms Lin encountered by Mr Cui as he fled after stabbing Ms Lin. Mr Cui also accepted that he stabbed a second man, Jun Xin, giving rise to the attempted murder charge.
The central issue at trial was whether the Crown had proved the requisite intent to kill on the part of Mr Cui. Mr Cui claimed that he had acted in self-defence or had acted in response to provocation. To support those contentions he relied, in part, on evidence of his own intoxication at the relevant time.

The issues

Mr Cui seeks leave to appeal out of time against both conviction and sentence. We are satisfied that an adequate explanation has been given to justify leave being granted. We grant leave to appeal out of time.
On the conviction appeal, counsel for Mr Cui, submitted that:
a.The trial Judge failed to correct a mis-statement of the law made by counsel for the Crown in his closing address, either immediately after the statement had been made or, subsequently, in her summing up. Further, this error was compounded by the Judge repeating, in paraphrased form, the mis-statement in her summation to the jury. The mis-statement concerned the relevance of intoxication to proof of an intent to kill.
b.The Judge failed to provide any directions to the jury on the effect of intoxication on questions of intent arising on the attempted murder charge.
c.The Judge failed adequately to summarise the kernel of evidence given by a psychiatrist called by the accused. That evidence was designed to assist the jury to evaluate the likely effect of the alcohol consumed by Mr Cui on his ability…

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 The Queen v WEN Hui Cui

Details

AGLC: The Queen v WEN Hui Cui [2006] NZCA 275
Case: [2006] NZCA 275
Decision Date: 28 September 2006

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of The Queen v Wen Hui Cui involved an appeal against both conviction and sentence by Wen Hui Cui, who was convicted of two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. The central issue was whether the trial judge had erred in various respects that could have led to a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the appeal against conviction was without merit. The appeal against sentence was also dismissed. The court considered several issues, including the judge's handling of intoxication as a factor in the crime, the admissibility of certain photographs, and the appropriateness of the minimum non-parole period. The court concluded that the trial judge had not made any errors that would warrant setting aside the convictions or altering the sentence.

Orders