You are here:
NZLII >>
Databases >>
Court of Appeal of New Zealand >>
2021 >>
[2021] NZCA 241
Database Search
| Name Search
| Recent Decisions
| Noteup
| LawCite
| Download
| Help
Aramoana v R [2021] NZCA 241 (9 June 2021)
Last Updated: 15 June 2021
|
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW
ZEALANDI
TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA
|
|
|
BETWEEN
|
ERU NANABOY ARAMOANA Appellant
|
|
AND
|
THE QUEEN Respondent
|
Hearing:
|
19 May 2021
|
Court:
|
Cooper, Simon France and Edwards JJ
|
Counsel:
|
K H Maxwell for Appellant J E Mildenhall for Respondent
|
Judgment:
|
9 June 2021 at 10.30 am
|
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
- The
application for leave to withdraw a notice of abandonment is declined.
- An
extension of time for the sentence appeal is granted.
- Leave
to adduce further evidence on the sentence appeal is
granted.
____________________________________________________________________
REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Simon France
J)
- [1] Mr Aramoana
was convicted in November 2018 on one charge of aggravated robbery. He was
sentenced on 17 January 2019 to a term
of imprisonment of five and a half
years.[1] On 3 April 2019 he filed a
notice of appeal. The notice was described as a sentence appeal, but the
grounds were directed towards
a conviction appeal.
- [2] A minute of
this Court confirmed it was an appeal against both conviction and
sentence.[2] More specificity of the
grounds of appeal for both the conviction and the sentence appeal was required
to be filed. There were
then two subsequent telephone conferences, at the
second of which abandonment was indicated. Counsel then acting for Mr Aramoana,
who had represented him at trial, said the abandonment would be effected either
by counsel memorandum or a notice signed by Mr Aramoana.
- [3] As it
happens, a notice was filed, but signed by counsel. On its face it abandons
only the conviction appeal.
- [4] On 5
February 2020, about two months after the notice of abandonment was filed,
Mr Aramoana filed a notice of application for
leave to withdraw the
abandonment of his sentence appeal. The essence of the proposed appeal would be
the proposition that insufficient
recognition was given to cultural
factors.
- [5] Having
reviewed the documentation, we are satisfied the sentence appeal has never
actually been abandoned. The abandonment notice
relates only to the conviction
appeal. Mr Aramoana has been consistent, right from the original
sentencing, in his desire for a
report under s 27 of the Sentencing Act 2002 to
be obtained and factored into his sentence. A s 27 report has been filed in
support
of the present application.
- [6] Subsequent
to the hearing the Registrar has made us aware that after the notice of
abandonment was filed, counsel then acting
for Mr Aramoana sent an email
confirming that the sentence appeal was also abandoned. However,
neither Mr Aramoana nor his counsel
amended and signed the notice of
abandonment to that effect as required by r 35(2) of the Court of Appeal
(Criminal) Rules 2001.
Conclusion
- [7] The
application will be formally declined because in fact there is no abandonment to
withdraw.
- [8] To advance
matters we grant an extension of time for the sentence appeal to be filed (the
original notice of appeal was filed
33 working days out of time).
- [9] We also
grant leave for further evidence to be adduced on the sentence appeal. This
grant of leave is limited to the s 27 report
already filed.
Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for
Respondent
[1] R v Aramoana [2019]
NZDC 657.
[2] Aramoana v R
CA143/2019, 23 August 2019 (minute of Stevens J).
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZCA/2021/241.html