Unesi v The Queen

Case [2011] NZCA 120


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA167/2011
[2011] NZCA 120

BETWEEN  VAHID UNESI
Applicant

AND  THE QUEEN
Respondent

Counsel:         D J Ryken for Applicant
S B Edwards for Respondent

Judgment:      31 March 2011 at 10 am

(on the papers)

JUDGMENT OF ELLEN FRANCE J

The application for bail is granted on the following conditions, namely, that the applicant:

(a)       Reside at Unit 8E, Point Ridge Avenue, Albany, North Shore, Auckland;

(b)      Surrender any passport(s) held (if not done so already);

(c)       Not apply for travel documents; and

(d)Report to the North Shore Police Station (Takapuna) between the hours of 9 am and 5 pm on Mondays.

REASONS

  1. The applicant was convicted on 16 December 2010 after trial by Judge alone on one count of providing false information to an immigration officer under s 142(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1987 and sentenced to five months home detention on 2 March 2011.  He has filed an appeal against conviction.

  2. On the face of it, amendments made to s 399(3) of the Crimes Act 1961 and s 124(3) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, when home detention became a stand alone sentence, provide that the sentence is automatically suspended when an appeal is filed.  Conversely, s 80ZB(b) of the Sentencing Act 2002 provides that, in these circumstances, time ceases to run on the sentence only during any period in which an offender is released on bail pending an appeal.

  3. This issue has been the subject of a number of recent decisions of this Court.[1]  In each case the Court has emphasised that it considers it desirable and appropriate for offenders who seek suspension of home detention sentences pending appeal to seek bail.

    [1]R v Edwards [2008] NZCA 109, R v Bisschop [2008] NZCA 229, R v Ward [2008] NZCA 328, R v Lima [2008] NZCA 513 and Sua v R [2010] NZCA 589.

  4. In light of the Court’s view on this issue, the parties to the present appeal consent to the granting of bail pending determination of the appeal.  In the circumstances, I agree that this course is appropriate.

  5. The following bail conditions are agreed to:

    (a)That the applicant reside at Unit 8E, Point Ridge Avenue, Albany, North Shore, Auckland;

    (b)That the applicant surrender any passport(s) held (if he has not done so already); and

    (c)That the applicant not apply for any travel documents;

  6. I am satisfied that these conditions are appropriate.  Neither the applicant nor the Crown made reference to a reporting requirement.  But in my view, a reporting condition is appropriate and necessary.

  7. Bail is granted on the agreed conditions together with a requirement that the applicant report to the North Shore Policing Centre between the hours of 9 am and 5 pm on Mondays.

  8. The appeal should be set down for hearing as soon as possible.

Solicitors:
Ryken and Associates, Auckland for Applicant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent


Details
AGLC
Unesi v The Queen [2011] NZCA 120
Case
[2011] NZCA 120
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Unesi v The Queen, the applicant, Vahid Unesi, was convicted on one count of providing false information to an immigration officer under section 142(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1987. He was sentenced to five months home detention, which he commenced on 2 March 2011. Unesi subsequently filed an appeal against his conviction. The legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the automatic suspension of the home detention sentence, as provided by sections 399(3) of the Crimes Act 1961 and 124(3) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, applied upon the filing of an appeal. The Court had to consider this in light of section 80ZB(b) of the Sentencing Act 2002, which provided that time ceases to run on the sentence only during any period in which an offender is released on bail pending an appeal.

The Court of Appeal examined previous decisions where it had been established that offenders who seek suspension of home detention sentences pending appeal should seek bail. The Court emphasised that it considered it desirable and appropriate for offenders to seek bail in these circumstances. Both parties in the present appeal agreed that bail should be granted pending the determination of the appeal. The Court agreed with the parties that bail should be granted on certain conditions to ensure the applicant complies with the requirements while the appeal is being determined. These conditions included the applicant residing at a specified address, surrendering any passports held, not applying for travel documents, and reporting to the police station on Mondays between 9 am and 5 pm.

The Court granted bail on the agreed conditions, also adding a requirement for the applicant to report to the North Shore Policing Centre on Mondays between the hours of 9 am and 5 pm. The Court considered these conditions appropriate and necessary for the protection of the public and to ensure the applicant adheres to the terms of his bail while the appeal is pending. The appeal was scheduled to be set down for hearing as soon as possible. The Court's decision was based on the need to balance the rights of the applicant with the safety and security of the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.