L v Police HC Wanganui CRI 2009-483-19 [2009] NZHC 982 (11 August 2009)

Last Updated: 13 January 2016

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WANGANUI REGISTRY

_{CRI 2009-483-19}

L

Applicant

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 11 August 2009 (Heard at Wellington)

Counsel: D Goodlet for Applicant

J Webber (On Instructions) for Crown

Judgment: 11 August 2009

JUDGMENT OF SIMON FRANCE J (Bail Appeal)

[1] Mr L appeals the refusal of bail.

[2] In March 2009 Mr L was charged with cannabis offending, plus a count of burglary. He obtained High Court bail, and spent five weeks on strict curfew conditions. Over that time there was one disputed occasion of breach. The Court did not resolve the dispute since the circumstances did not in any event require

_{revocation of bail.}

L V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC WANG CRI 2009-483-19 11 August 2009

[3] However, on 30 April 2009 matters changed when Mr L was charged with twenty further burglaries. The alleged offending predates the March bail date. When Mr L appeared in the District Court on these charges, bail was declined. The Judge considered the re-offending risk posed by Mr L was too significant.

[4] The appeal is advanced on the basis that an electronic monitoring option is now available. Given that Mr L complied with less stringent bail conditions for five weeks, it is submitted that Court can be reassured as to the likelihood of compliance.

[5] Ms Goodlet presented her client’s position well, but in my view an electronic monitoring option does not alter the situation. In March 2007 Mr L was sentenced to seven months jail. Then on 17 November 2008 he was sentenced to one year jail on a raft of matters including drug offending, and convictions for receiving (x2), burglary and possession of burglary instruments. Presumably there was a period of pre-trial custodial remand because he was released shortly after being sentenced.

[6] The new burglary charges involve allegations of offending commencing in mid-December 2008. The evidence presently available includes text messages from Mr L offering to supply people with property which he had stolen in the burglaries. Search warrants were obtained and the property was located at the addresses of the receivers. Although the strength of the case varies across the twenty counts, on some the state of the evidence against Mr L is compelling.

[7] Such offending coming almost immediately upon release from a jail term for the same offending makes bail unrealistic. Mr L poses a significant risk of re-offending in an area which is rightly of great concern to people – residential burglaries. He also has numerous convictions for non-compliance with past sanctions – disqualified driving, failure to answer bail, breach of community and breach of conditions.

_{[8] I fully agree with the District Court. The appeal is declined.}

Simon France J

Solicitors:

D Goodlet, Barrister, Wanganui, fax: [phone]

J Webber, Luke Cunningham & Clere, PO Box 10357, Wellington, email: [e-mail]