Zheng v The Queen

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA430/2015
[2015] NZCA 369

BETWEEN	JIU MEI ZHENG Applicant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Telephone

Conference:

7 August 2015

Counsel:

G C Gotlieb for Applicant
M J Lillico for Respondent

Judgment:

(On the papers)

12 August 2015 at 3.00 pm

JUDGMENT OF FRENCH J

The application for bail pending appeal is declined.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Ms Zheng has applied for bail pending the determination of an appeal against conviction and sentence. She was convicted in the High Court of drug dealing offences involving pseudoephedrine[1] and sentenced on 24 July 2015 by Gilbert J to a term of imprisonment of two years and nine months.[2]
[1]Ms Zheng was found guilty following jury trial of five charges of supplying pseudoephedrine and one charge of possession of pseudoephedrine for the purpose of supply.
[2]Lam v R [2015] NZHC 1713.
The primary grounds of the bail application are that permanent arrangements have yet to be made for the care of her dependent children; the prospects of success on appeal are “very strong”; Ms Zheng, who does not speak English, may experience difficulties having her medical and dietary needs met in prison; and if her appeal is not granted a hearing date swiftly, she will be eligible for parole in 11 months, meaning the appeal could be rendered nugatory.
At the time the bail application was filed, the appeal did not have a hearing date and it was assumed to be some considerable time away. However, the Court has been able to provide an early hearing date of 2 September 2015. In my view, in those circumstances, the concerns raised by her counsel lose much of their force. Further, while I am obviously not in a position to attempt any extensive analysis of the merits of the appeal, on the limited information before me I would not necessarily endorse Mr Gotlieb’s assessment of them as falling in the “very strong” category so as to justify bail.
Having regard to s 14 of the Bail Act 2000, Ms Zheng has failed to satisfy me that hers is a case where on the balance of probabilities, it is in the interests of justice to grant her bail pending appeal.
The application for bail is accordingly declined.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jiu Mei Zheng has applied for bail pending appeal against her conviction and sentence for drug dealing offences involving pseudoephedrine. Ms Zheng was found guilty on six charges and was sentenced to two years and nine months imprisonment. The application for bail pending appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Ms Zheng’s primary grounds for bail were the lack of permanent arrangements for her children, the prospects of success on appeal, potential difficulties in having her medical and dietary needs met in prison, and the possibility of her becoming eligible for parole before her appeal is heard. The Court of Appeal has set a hearing date for the appeal of 2 September 2015. The Court found that Ms Zheng had not satisfied the requirements of section 14 of the Bail Act 2000, and therefore the application for bail was declined.

The legal issues before the Court were whether the application for bail pending appeal should be granted. The Court was required to determine whether the interests of justice would be served by granting bail, and whether the grounds for bail were sufficient to warrant such a decision. The Court noted that it was not in a position to make an extensive analysis of the merits of the appeal, but considered the limited information before it. The Court found that the concerns raised by Ms Zheng’s counsel lost much of their force given the early hearing date for the appeal, and that the prospects of success on appeal were not necessarily as strong as counsel had suggested. The Court considered the factors set out in section 14 of the Bail Act 2000, and found that Ms Zheng had not satisfied the requirements for bail.

The Court of Appeal declined the application for bail pending appeal, finding that Ms Zheng had not satisfied the requirements of section 14 of the Bail Act 2000. The Court noted that the concerns raised by Ms Zheng’s counsel had lost much of their force given the early hearing date for the appeal, and that the prospects of success on appeal were not necessarily as strong as counsel had suggested. The Court found that the interests of justice would not be served by granting bail in this case. No orders were made in relation to the appeal.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established