The Queen v Neil Barry Patrick

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA440/07
[2008] NZCA 83
THE QUEEN
v
NEIL BARRY PATRICK
Hearing:3 March 2008

Court:Chambers, Gendall and Harrison JJ
Counsel:W C Pyke for Appellant

M D Downs for Crown

Judgment:11 April 2008 at 11 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for bail is allowed. The appellant is released on bail until 9 am on 2 May 2008, at which time he is to report to the criminal counter of the High Court at Auckland. Bail is subject to the following conditions:
(a)He must reside at 12 Livingston Avenue, Hamilton;
(b)He must abstain from alcohol and drugs, unless prescribed by a medical doctor;
(c)He must not enter licensed premises except supermarkets.

REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Chambers J)
[1]       We heard the appellant’s appeal on 3 March. Since then new material has become available. As a consequence, the appellant has sought to reopen the appeal and introduce a further ground of appeal. The Crown has not opposed the broadening of the appeal. We have given leave accordingly. We are due to resume hearing the appeal on 2 May in Auckland.
[2]       The appellant has now applied for bail pending the determination of his appeal, pursuant to s 70 of the Bail Act 2000. The Crown consents to the application for bail.
[3]       The test to be applied in relation to the application is that set out in s 14 of the Bail Act. In terms of that section, we are satisfied on the balance of probabilities that it is in the interests of justice for bail to be granted until 2 May 2008.
Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Queen v Neil Barry Patrick was heard in the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. The case involved an appeal against a decision made by a lower court, with the appellant being Neil Barry Patrick. The central issue was whether the appellant should be granted bail pending the determination of his appeal, in accordance with section 70 of the Bail Act 2000. The Crown did not oppose the application for bail.

The legal issue before the court was whether it was in the interests of justice to grant bail to the appellant until the appeal was determined. The court was required to apply the test set out in section 14 of the Bail Act, which involves assessing the balance of probabilities regarding the interests of justice. The court needed to consider whether granting bail would serve the interests of justice, taking into account factors such as the nature of the offence, the likelihood of the appellant appearing in court, and any other relevant circumstances.

The Court of Appeal determined that it was in the interests of justice to grant bail to the appellant until the appeal was determined on 2 May 2008. The court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that granting bail would not adversely affect the administration of justice. The bail conditions imposed included requiring the appellant to reside at a specified address, abstain from alcohol and drugs unless prescribed by a medical doctor, and not enter licensed premises except supermarkets. The Crown had consented to the application for bail, and the appellant was released on bail until the specified date.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established