The Queen v Greer [2006] NZCA 126 (15 June 2006)

Last Updated: 22 June 2006

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA161/03
CA179/06

THE QUEEN



v



ALAN IVO GREER

Hearing: 13 June 2006

Court: Robertson, Gendall and Venning JJ

Counsel: Appellant in person
W C Pyke as Amicus curiae
P K Hamlin for Crown

Judgment: 15 June 2006

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A Management Orders made for facilitating the hearing of the two appeals.

B Application for bail pending an appeal hearing is refused.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

(Given by Robertson J)

[1]	These two matters were listed for mention in the Court on Monday 12 June 2006. Because of Auckland’s power blackout, it was not possible for the matter to be heard until 13 June 2006.
[2]	Although there was some suggestion of a substantive hearing on CA161/03 (the driving case), it soon became clear that that was not the position as it has a fixture date of 31 August 2006. The President’s Minute of 15 May 2006, which appointed Mr Pyke as Amicus, noted that there was an application for an adjournment of the August fixture which had not been determined.
[3]	In respect of CA179/06 (the sexual offending case) a Minute of the Court dated 25 May 2006 noted that Mr Greer had turned down an appeal hearing in this matter on 22 June 2005 but that a bail application was to be heard by us. We note that Mr Pyke had been appointed in respect of this appeal as well.
[4]	An application for habeas corpus was also placed before us. We discussed this with Mr Greer as we understood that there was a habeas corpus matter now within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Mr Greer acknowledged there was, but was insistent that it was about a different matter.
[5]	Mr Greer was not attracted to the suggestion that his complaint (from the face of the document filed) was about the nature of his detention and not the legality of it. He was adamant that it was a matter which required urgent attention and he was subsequently advised of a fixture in the High Court on Friday 16 June 2006 at 2.15pm.
[6]	A number of troublesome issues arise with regard to both these cases.
[7]	First, it is not clear to the Court, nor indeed to Mr Pyke, as to the brief upon which he has been appointed as Amicus in both these matters. It is essential that he be provided with some direction as to the nature and extent of the appointment. It was suggested that his role might be restricted to areas of legal principle arising in the cases, but there seemed to be some perception that he was to be available to pursue matters raised by Mr Greer. Mr Greer’s files do not demonstrate a lively knowledge or acceptance of rules as to relevance or probative value. There would appear to be no end to the tasks Mr Pyke might be cajoled to perform if the situation is as open-ended as that.
[8]	Secondly, there is on the driving file no simple and concise statement (in perhaps an A4 sheet of bullet points) as to the grounds of appeal. There are many words about ‘perversion of justice’, ‘conspiracy’ and the like, but the appeal must boil down to:

(a) was there evidence before the Court on which a properly directed jury could find:

(i) Mr Greer was the driver at the relevant time; and
(ii) that he was at the time a disqualified driver; and

(b) was there a miscarriage of justice such that the proviso to s 385 would not apply?

[9]	Mr Greer agreed that a summary document could be filed and served by 1 July 2006. It will at least be possible to determine then what in the way of further disclosure may be required.
[10]	In the meantime, Mr Hamlin has agreed:

(a) to obtain a report to the Court with regard to the certified copy of a criminal record dated 31 May 1996 relating to a disqualification imposed in the Porirua District Court on 4 May 1995. This was Exhibit One in the trial at the District Court at Levin in August 1997.
(b) To determine whether there is in existence any tape recording of conversations between Constable McCardle and Police Operations in the Manawatu on 15 May 1996 relative to Mr Greer.
(c) To ascertain whether any photos of Mr Greer were taken following his arrest on 15 May 1996.
(c) To obtain from the Police Complaints file a copy of the complaint made by Mr Greer and the report issued by it. Any other part of the Police Complaints Authority file will be inadmissible.

[11]	In respect of the sexual offending file, the Minute of the Court dated 25 May 2006 required the preparation of a case on appeal as soon as possible. We have since been advised that steps are underway and it is seen as a matter of urgency although a copy of the summing up is not yet available.
[12]	Fourteen days following receipt of that case on appeal, Mr Greer will file and serve an A4 page of bullet points about the grounds of appeal being raised in that appeal also.
[13]	That leaves the issue of bail. We have had regard to the application made by Mr Greer, submissions in support dated 6 June 2006, additional limited submissions dated 13 June 2006, memorandum of Mr Pyke dated 8 June 2006 and the Notice of Opposition to Bail dated 29 May 2006.
[14]	The situation is covered by s 14 of the Bail Act 2000.
[15]	Mr Greer was tried and convicted on ten serious charges and sentenced to an effective term of seven years’ imprisonment.
[16]	All parties before us understood the force and effect of s 14. We have also been mindful of the provision of s 70(2) of the Bail Act.
[17]	The appropriate tests were discussed by this Court in R v Devereux CA318/04 30 September 2004.
[18]	Mr Hamlin raised questions as to the current health of Mr Greer, but Mr Greer objected to the Court even viewing the report which had been prepared on his health at the time of his sentencing in July 2004.
[19]	The Court is severely inhibited at this stage. When we invited Mr Greer to identify what his real grounds of appeal were likely to be he said:

(a) a lack of disclosure before and at trial;

(b) the two year delay in processing the appeal;
(c) the absence of trial counsel; and
(d) inadequate facilities available to him as a sentenced prisoner at the time of his trial.

[20]	It is quite impossible on the current state of the file to have any sensible knowledge as to the strength of the grounds of appeal. A document which Mr Greer filed in August 2004 is exaggerated, emotional and immoderate, if not scandalous.
[21]	This man was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. The length of time until his appeal is heard is substantially in the hands of Mr Greer. If and when he decides, in a focused, disciplined and sensible way, to indicate his case and accept a fixture, then the appeal can be heard.
[22]	We do have concern about the position of the victims of the offending and those around them in weighing the bail application.
[23]	Mr Greer has well over 150 convictions spanning a period of 30 years. It is clear that he finds any form of restraint or control irksome. He has frequently demonstrated an inability to maintain the most basic standards which the community expects of those who are free within it.
[24]	Mr Greer has been sentenced to imprisonment for dozens of offences. He appears to be consumed by conspiracy theories about everybody who has been near his cases, and who do not share his perception of what has happened or should now occur.
[25]	Nothing has been advanced before us would give which any confidence that the interests of justice would be served by granting Mr Greer bail.
[26]	We are not unmindful of the difficulties which face any sentenced prisoner in preparing for an appeal. Orders have been made and directions given with regard to the obligations of the Corrections Department. Problems in enforcing those cannot dictate this application. If his rights are being infringed, other avenues are available for remedy.
[27]	The application for bail pending hearing of the appeal is refused.
[28]	It is clear that the full hearing of the driving case appeal on 31 August 2006 will not be able to proceed.
[29]	Both files require reconsideration at a conference which should be held in Auckland during the week commencing 28 August 2006.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington