Wallace v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
[2013] NZCA 14
•15 February 2013
| IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND |
| CA68/2013 [2013] NZCA 14 |
| BETWEEN JAY MAUI WALLACE |
| AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS |
| Hearing: 13 February 2013 |
| Court: White, Simon France and Asher JJ |
| Counsel: Appellant in person by way of audio-visual link |
| Judgment: 15 February 2013 at 4.00pm |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
AThe application for a writ of habeas corpus should not have been accepted for filing in the High Court.
BThe appeal is struck out.
CThe appellant must pay costs to the respondent for a standard appeal on a band A basis and usual disbursements.
____________________________________________________________________
REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by White J)
This is an appeal by Mr Jay Maui Wallace, also known as Abdullah Jay Maui Wallace, against the judgment of Venning J dismissing his application for habeas corpus and ordering him to pay costs of $500 to the respondent.[1]
[1] Wallace v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2013] NZHC 14.
Mr Wallace is serving a sentence of five years two months’ imprisonment imposed in the High Court at Auckland on 30 June 2011.[2] He is imprisoned pursuant to warrants of commitment dated 30 June 2011 signed by Brewer J.
[2] R v Wallace HC Auckland CRI-2010-092-2879, 30 June 2011.
Pre and post-trial protests by Mr Wallace to the High Court’s jurisdiction and appeals against his conviction and sentence were all dismissed.[3]
[3]R v Wallace HC Auckland CRI-2010-092-2879, 11 October 2010, Wallace v R [2011] NZSC 10, Wallace v R [2011] NZCA 123, Wallace v R [2012] NZCA 139 and Wallace v R [2012] NZSC 54.
Similarly, previous applications and appeals by Mr Wallace for habeas corpus have been dismissed on the ground that he was lawfully detained under the warrants of commitment signed by Brewer J.[4]
[4]Wallace v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections HC Auckland CIV-2011-404-4235, 19 July 2011, Wallace v Ministry of Justice [2011] NZCA 678 and Wallace v Chief Executive of Department of Corrections [2012] NZSC 16.
In support of his present appeal, Mr Wallace has raised a range of issues relating to his identity, the legality of his imprisonment and the jurisdiction of the New Zealand Courts, but in the course of presenting his submissions at the hearing of his appeal he stated that:
(a)he accepted the jurisdiction of the New Zealand Courts; and
(b)he was the person who had been sentenced to imprisonment by Brewer J on 30 June 2011.
We are satisfied that Mr Wallace has no new grounds to advance in support of the present habeas corpus application or this appeal. In terms of s 15(1) of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001 and the decision of this Court in Misiuk v Attorney-General[5] his application for habeas corpus should not have been accepted by the High Court because his previous applications and appeals determined substantially the same questions as raised on this application.
[5] Misiuk v Attorney-General [2012] NZCA 13 [2012] NZAR 176 at [8]–[9].
As the previous determinations of Mr Wallace’s applications and appeals were final, his present appeal should therefore be struck out.
As the application was inappropriate,[6] the respondent is entitled to an order for costs for a standard appeal on a band A basis and usual disbursements.
[6] Arumalla v Kilari [2009] NZCA 361 at [7].
Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Auckland for Respondent
7
0