NZLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Court of Appeal of New Zealand

You are here:  NZLII >> Databases >> Court of Appeal of New Zealand >> 2011 >> [2011] NZCA 166

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Haskell v R [2011] NZCA 166 (20 April 2011)

Last Updated: 26 April 2011


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA896/2010
[2011] NZCA 166

BETWEEN BRENT WAYNE HASKELL
Appellant

AND THE QUEEN
Respondent

Hearing: 20 April 2011

Counsel: M J Kidd for Appellant
K A L Bicknell for Respondent

Judgment: 20 April 2011 at 5.30 pm

JUDGMENT OF CHAMBERS J

The application for bail is dismissed.


REASONS

[1] The appellant was convicted on five counts of sexual conduct with a person under the age of 16. On 28 March this year, he was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. He is appealing to this court against this conviction and also against sentence.
[2] The appellant has applied for bail pending the determination of his appeal, pursuant to s 70 of the Bail Act 2000. I personally have considered the application pursuant to s 393(2)(d) of the Crimes Act 1961.
[3] 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.
[4] The factors to be considered on an application under s 14 are set out in subs (3). There are no factors pointing strongly towards a grant of bail. There is one factor which points strongly against the grant of bail. That is the fact the Court can offer the appellant a hearing date for his substantive appeal as early as 9 May. I offered Dr Kidd, the appellant’s counsel, three dates in May when the Court could hear the appeal: 9, 16 and 23 May. Dr Kidd elected to take the 23 May date, which I confirm.
[5] In view of the very short time before the appeal is heard, I consider the case for bail has not been made out. I also consider that the appellant has not shown any personal circumstances which favour bail at this stage.
[6] For these reasons, I have dismissed the application.

Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington


NZLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2011/166.html