Wendy Maree Egen v The Queen

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 112/2011
[2011] NZSC 156

WENDY MAREE EGEN

THE QUEEN

Court: Elias CJ, McGrath and William Young JJ

Judgment: 16 December 2011

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

REASONS

The applicant seeks leave to appeal against her conviction by a jury on charges involving three incidents of assaults on her teenage daughter. She was sentenced to 125 hours community work and 9 months supervision. The Court of Appeal[1] has dismissed her appeals against conviction and sentence in a judgment which includes a full discussion of the evidence given at the applicant’s trial.
[1] Egen v The Queen [2011] NZCA 372.
The proposed ground of appeal to this Court is that the applicant had wanted to testify at her trial but, on the advice of her lawyer, was discouraged from doing so.
The applicant is not represented by counsel. Her written submissions in support of her application for leave to appeal were due on 24 November 2011. On 1 December 2011 the Registrar wrote to her telling her to file submissions by 5 December at the latest. They are still not to hand.
In those circumstances, we have considered the judgment of the Court of Appeal and what is said in the application for leave to appeal concerning the proposed ground of appeal. We are satisfied that the application does not raise an arguable issue that there has been a miscarriage of justice. Nor is there any other ground available that would make it in the interests of justice that the applicant should have leave to bring a further appeal.
The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wendy Maree Egen sought leave to appeal against her conviction and sentence imposed by a jury for assaulting her teenage daughter on three occasions. The Supreme Court of New Zealand, comprising Elias CJ, McGrath, and William Young JJ, was tasked with determining whether Egen's application for leave to appeal should be granted. Egen argued that she had wanted to testify at her trial but was dissuaded from doing so by her lawyer. The Court of Appeal had previously dismissed her appeals against both conviction and sentence, providing a comprehensive discussion of the evidence presented at the trial.

The legal issues before the Supreme Court centred on whether the application for leave to appeal raised an arguable issue of miscarriage of justice or any other ground that would warrant allowing a further appeal. The court was required to evaluate the merits of Egen's proposed ground of appeal and assess whether it met the threshold for being considered an arguable issue. Additionally, the court had to consider whether there were any other grounds that would make it just to grant leave to appeal.

In dismissing the application for leave to appeal, the Supreme Court found that the proposed ground did not establish a miscarriage of justice or any other significant ground that would warrant further appeal. The court noted that Egen's written submissions were overdue and that she had failed to comply with the court's directions. Given these circumstances and after reviewing the Court of Appeal's judgment, the Supreme Court concluded that the application did not meet the necessary criteria for leave to appeal to be granted.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established