Williams v The Queen - [2017] NZCA 329

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA313/2015
[2017] NZCA 329

BETWEEN	KELVIN JOHN WILLIAMS Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	7 June 2017 (further submissions received from appellant 22 June 2017)
Court:	Harrison, Winkelmann and Brown JJ
Counsel:	A J Bamford for Appellant J C Pike QC for Respondent
Judgment:	1 August 2017 at 11.00 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application to adduce fresh evidence on appeal is declined.
BThe appeal is allowed.
CThe conviction for murder is quashed.
DA conviction for manslaughter is substituted for the murder conviction.
EThe sentence of life imprisonment is quashed.
FMr Williams is re-sentenced to eight years’ imprisonment.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Winkelmann J)

Introduction

In 1995 the appellant, Mr Williams, was found guilty on one count of murder following a trial in the High Court at Nelson before Doogue J and a jury. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
In late 1995 he appealed to this Court, an appeal dismissed under a truncated process this Court used at that time to deal with some appeals.[1] That process was later considered by the Privy Council in R v Taito and found to have involved “a fundamentally flawed and unlawful system”.[2]
[1]R v Williams CA512/95, 29 March 1996.
[2]R v Taito [2003] UKPC 15, [2003] 3 NZLR 577 at [21].
In 2015, 20 years later, Mr Williams applied for a rehearing of his appeal.[3] There is no opposition to the application for a rehearing. This Court has the inherent power to revisit its decisions in exceptional circumstances when required by the interests of justice.[4] Given the procedural background to this application, we are satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist. Mr Williams’ earlier appeal was dismissed following a fundamentally flawed process; it is in the interests of justice that Mr Williams be granted a rehearing of his appeal.
[3]Issues with Mr Williams’ representation and the gathering of evidence for the appeal caused substantial delay in its progress.
[4]R v Smith [2003] 3 NZLR 617 (CA) at [40].
Mr Williams says he ought to have been acquitted on the count of murder. He says that he should instead have been convicted on a lesser count of manslaughter.

Background

The offending in brief

Mr Williams was charged with murdering Clinton Strong. The events that led to Mr Strong’s death occurred in the early hours of New Year’s Day 1995 in a street in Motueka. It is apparent there was a street fight between Mr Williams and Mr Strong. The cause of death was attributed principally to blood loss caused by Mr Strong’s liver splitting when a serious amount of force drove it up against his spinal column.

Police interviews

Mr Williams was quickly identified by the police as a suspect and interviewed by them. He made a written statement to police and then took part in four police interviews (videotaped) and one video demonstration. Mr Williams admitted fighting with Mr Strong but claimed the fight took place some distance…

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 Williams v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Williams v The Queen [2017] NZCA 329
Case: [2017] NZCA 329
Decision Date: 1 August 2017 at 11.00 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Williams was convicted of murder in 1995 and sentenced to life imprisonment. His first appeal in 1996 was dismissed under a procedure that was later found to be unlawful by the Privy Council. Williams applied for a rehearing of his appeal in 2015. The court found that exceptional circumstances existed and granted the rehearing. Williams argued that he should have been acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter instead. The court agreed that a miscarriage of justice had occurred because evidence of Williams' previous convictions was admitted, which was highly prejudicial and could have affected the jury's assessment of his intent. The appeal was allowed, the conviction for murder was quashed, and a conviction for manslaughter was substituted. Williams was re-sentenced to eight years' imprisonment.

Orders