Youth Court Decisions How to Use Full list of key titles CYPFA section Date

Police v Manuel (1998) 16 CRNZ 62; 17 FRNZ 394

Case summary provided by BROOKERS

Name: Police v Manuel
Reported: (1998) 16 CRNZ 62; 17 FRNZ 394
File number: CRN 8009030441
Date: 21 August 1998
Court: Youth Court
ocation: Christchurch
Judge: Bisphan DCJ
Charge: Wounding with Intent to Injure
CYPFA: s277
Key Title: Adult co-offenders

BROOKERS Summary:

Children, young person, and their families - Youth justice - Jurisdiction - Adult charged jointly with three young persons - Depositions for all four defendants conducted in Youth Court - Young persons elected trial in Youth Court - Whether adult defendant could be committed to Youth Court for trial before Judge alone - Circumstances in which adult defendant could be dealt with in Youth Court - Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, s 277.

The four defendants were jointly charged with wounding with intent to injure, a purely indictable offence. Defendant C M was an adult for the purposes of the proceedings. The other defendants were young persons. The Judge found sufficient evidence for trial and the defendants indicated they would not plead guilty. The Judge decided that the defendant young persons should have the option of trial in the Youth Court, and that option was taken up. The issue remained as to where C M should be tried.

Held, committing the defendant C M to the High Court for trial

(1) Where depositions are held in the Youth Court in respect of young persons and adults jointly charged, if there is sufficient evidence to put the adult on trial then that person must be committed to the appropriate Court (either District Court or High Court). The adult cannot be dealt with either on the basis of a defended hearing or in a sentencing context in the Youth Court. (p 399, line 15)

(2) In this case it followed that once the young persons had been given the election to be dealt with in the Youth Court, there was no option but to commit C M to the High Court for trial. (p 398, line 42)

(3) The Court preferred to interpret s 277 Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 as applying to the following:

(a) Murder, manslaughter and purely indictable offences, but only up to and including depositions;

(b) Indictable offences (where the maximum penalty is over 3 months' imprisonment) where jury trial is elected but only up to and including depositions;

(c) Indictable offences where summary jurisdiction is elected;and

(d) All other offences. (p 399, line 5)

Cases referred to

C v District Court at Dunedin (1993) 10 CRNZ 260
Police v W [1996] NZFLR 902[(1998) 17 FRNZ 394, 395]Police v Whitehead [1995] DCR 533
S v District Court at New Plymouth (1992) 9 FRNZ 57; 8 CRNZ 241, also reported as S v New Plymouth District Court [1992] 3 NZLR 508

Application

This was an application for young persons to be given the opportunity of foregoing the right of trial by jury and have the information heard and determined in the Youth Court. The question then arose as to where the jointly charged adult defendant should have his case heard.