W v Police HC Tauranga CRI 2007-470-15

[2007] NZHC 432

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

AT ROTORUA

CRI 2007-470-15

BETWEEN  W

Appellant

AND  NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing:         4 May 2007

Appearances: No appearance for Appellant

J O'Brien for Respondent

Judgment:      4 May 2007

ORALJUDGMENT OF PRIESTLEY J (Sentence Appeal)

Counsel:

J O’Brien, Crown Solicitors, P O Box 13063, Tauranga

Copy to:

A W W  , 34/B Langstone Road, Welcome Bay, Tauranga

W V NZ POLICE HC TAU CRI 2007-470-15  4 May 2007

[1]      The appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on 7 March.  He gave as his address for service 34/B Langstone Road, Welcome Bay in Tauranga.

[2]      On 27 April the Registry dispatched to that address a notification that the appeal would be heard this morning at 10 am.

[3]      No communication has been received from the appellant. He has been called three or four times and there was no appearance.

[4]      For the  respondent  Ms O’Brien understandably seeks to  have  the  appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.

[5]      The appellant acted for himself in the Tauranga District Court and is clearly acting for himself on this appeal.  I have read the file with considerable care.

[6]      The appellant is challenging his conviction by Ingram DCJ, in the Tauranga District Court on 12 February 2007, on a charge of male assaults female.   He was sentenced to 50 hours of community work, he having been convicted at the same hearing on an unrelated matter of obstructing a police officer.  The notice of appeal clearly does not attack that second conviction.

[7]      The notice of appeal asserts that the appellant did not assault the parking warden (who was a female).  And he did not “get the chance to have [his] say” and that the allegations were false.

[8]      I have read the notes of evidence.  The appellant cross-examined the traffic warden.   He also gave evidence himself.   There was evidence, which the Judge accepted, that after a verbal altercation, when the warden was ticketing the car whilst it was parked in a disabled car park in a street in Te Puke, the appellant, who was clearly distracted and pre-occupied by caring for a young child, alighted from his vehicle and during the course of the verbal exchange with the traffic warden swung his arm at her, hitting her.

[9]      As the Judge correctly pointed out this was a credibility issue.  His findings of fact were open to him.  I see absolutely nothing in the transcript of evidence or the

Judge’s reasoning process to suggest that the conviction is either unsafe or wrong. As a matter of fact an assault, albeit of a minor nature, occurred.

[10]     Both on the merits as appear from the file and because of the non-appearance of the appellant today this appeal is dismissed.

……………………

Priestley J