The Queen v Morris [2006] NZCA 182 (3 August 2006)

Last Updated: 15 August 2006

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA405/05

THE QUEEN



v



CHRISTOPHER CLIFF MORRIS

Counsel: C R Carruthers QC and D A Ewen for Appellant
C L Mander for Crown

Judgment: 3 August 2006

JUDGMENT OF O’REGAN J

A The appellant’s application for bail is granted. The appellant is released on bail for the period until this Court delivers judgment on his appeal, subject to the following conditions:
1. That he resides at 140 Woburn Road, Lower Hutt.

2. That he reports to the Lower Hutt police station between the hours of 4 pm and 6 pm, Mondays and Fridays.
3. That he surrenders his passport to the Registrar of the District Court at Wellington, (if not already held by the Police) and he is not to apply for any further travel documentation. The Registrar is to notify the Secretary of Internal Affairs of this condition.

B The position that will apply after delivery of judgment will be addressed in the Court’s judgment.

REASONS

[1]	The appellant was found guilty following a District Court jury trial of 67 charges of fraudulently using a document contrary to s 229A(b) of the Crimes Act 1961 (repealed in 2003). He was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five years. He appealed against his conviction and the appeal was heard by a division of this Court (O’Regan, Panckhurst and Potter JJ) on 18 May 2006. The Court reserved its decision, and has not yet issued judgment. However, the Court issued a minute on 20 July 2006 indicating that it sought submissions on the exercise of the discretion of the Court under s 385(2) of the Crimes Act 1961, in particular on whether a new trial should be directed if the appeal were allowed. Submissions for the appellant are due on 4 August 2006, and those for the Crown on 11 August 2006.
[2]	The appellant has now applied for bail pending the final disposition of his appeal on the grounds that the appeal has reasonable prospects of success and that his elderly mother is not expected to live for more than a few weeks. The application is based on s 70 of the Bail Act 2000. I personally have considered the application pursuant to s 393(2)(d) of the Crimes Act.
[3]	The Crown has filed a memorandum indicating that the Crown takes a neutral position on the application.
[4]	The test to be applied in relation to the application is that set out in s 14 of the Bail Act. Under s 14(1), bail is not to be granted unless the Court is satisfied on the balance of probabilities that it would be in the interests of justice in the particular case to do so. Section 14(2) provides that the onus is on the appellant to show cause why bail should be granted.
[5]	This is an unusual case because the minute issued on 20 July 2006 indicates the likelihood that the appeal will be granted, but seeks assistance as to whether a new trial should be ordered. If none is ordered, Mr Morris will be released. If a new trial is ordered, Mr Morris will no doubt argue he should be bailed pending the new trial, as he was on bail before his first trial. In those unusual circumstances, and in view of Mr Morris’s compliance with bail conditions before his trial, I am satisfied that it is in the interests of justice that bail should be granted.
[6]	I sought from counsel submissions on appropriate bail conditions, and received a joint memorandum on that topic. In accordance with the agreed position of counsel, I set the following conditions of bail:

(a) The appellant is to reside at 140 Woburn Road, Lower Hutt;

(b) The appellant is to report to the Lower Hutt police station between the hours of 4 pm and 6 pm, Mondays and Fridays;
(c) The appellant is to surrender his passport to the Registrar of the District Court at Wellington, (if not already held by the Police) and not he is not to apply for any further travel documentation. The Registrar is to notify the Secretary of Internal Affairs of this conditions.

[7]	Bail is granted until the date on which the Court delivers judgment on the appeal. The position following judgment will be addressed in the judgment.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington