R v Lavea [2014] NZHC 1088 (21 May 2014)

Last Updated: 2 July 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2013-004-4424 [2014] NZHC 1088

THE QUEEN

v

_{TINO MISI LAVEA}

Hearing:	21 May 2014
Appearances:	AJ Pollett for Crown GB Morison for Accused
Judgment:	21 May 2014

JUDGMENT OF TOOGOOD J [Section 347 Application]

This judgment was delivered by me on 21 May 2014 at 4:30 pm

Pursuant to Rule 11.5 High Court Rules

_{Registrar/Deputy Registrar}

R v LAVEA [2014] NZHC 1088 [21 May 2014]

[1] Tino Misi Lavea is charged that between 29 November 2011 and

28 November 2012 at Auckland he participated in an organised criminal group for the purpose of profiting from the manufacture and distribution of methamphetamine and the supply of pseudoephedrine. He is one of several accused named in the indictment. He applies for a discharge under s 347 of the Crimes Act 1961 on the grounds that, on the evidence to be adduced by the Crown, no reasonable jury, properly directed, would convict him.

[2] The charge arises following an extensive Police operation relating to alleged methamphetamine manufacture and associated drug offending. The other accused face particular charges relating to the manufacture, possession and supply of drugs, but there is no specific count alleging any offending by Mr Lavea.

[3] In his submissions in support of the application, Mr Morison indicated that he has approached the Police and Crown counsel on a number of occasions in order to establish precisely what role the applicant is said to have played in the alleged criminal group and, in particular, what evidence the Crown relies upon as proof. At the time he filed his submissions on 12 May 2014, Mr Morison had received no relevant information.

[4] Ms Pollett for the Crown says that the application and what the Crown considers “relevant evidence” have been reviewed and the application for a discharge is no longer opposed. I know no more than I have just explained about why Mr Lavea was named in the indictment in the first place, but it is plain that the Crown does not offer any evidence in support of the one charge he faces.

[5] Accordingly, I order that Mr Lavea be discharged forthwith under s 347 of the Crimes Act 1961. Orders under that section are required to be made in open Court. This matter is to be called in the callover on Wednesday, 4 June 2014 for that purpose. Mr Lavea’s attendance is excused.

....................................

Toogood J