[1] A search of the applicants’ home resulted in the police finding 9.32 grams of methamphetamine, $43,860 in cash, point bags, scales and a methamphetamine pipe. They were then charged with the possession of methamphetamine for supply and possession of utensils for the purpose of using methamphetamine.
[2] The applicants sought leave to appeal Judge Wiltens’ pre-trial ruling of 12 July 2010 that the evidence obtained from the search of their home on 16 October 2009 was admissible.
[3] The applicants also sought to challenge the search on the basis of further evidence obtained on disclosure which was not before Judge Wiltens. We refused to consider that further evidence.[1] As a consequence, by consent, the application for leave to appeal was declined.
[4] Mr Downs undertook that the Crown will file a fresh s 344A application for the challenge to the search to be pursued on a new basis: that the warrant should not have been executed because, by the time the warrant was executed, the police knew or ought to have known that Mr Jaime Sylva had been bailed to a different address.

Solicitors:
Tucker & Co, Auckland for Appellant Sylva
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

[1] Relying on the comments of this Court made in Taylor v R [2010] NZCA 333.

NZLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2010/455.html