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

Police v T [1998] DCR 538 (YC)

Case summary provided by LEXISNEXIS NZ

Name: Police v T
Reported: [1998] DCR 538
File number: CRN 8248020853
Date: 7 May 1998
Court: Youth Court
Location: Otahuhu
Judge: McElrea DCJ
Charge: Theft
CYPFA: s214; s239
Key Title: Police cell custody; Arrest without warrant; Rights

LEXISNEXIS Summary:

Children and young persons - Powers to arrest and detain - Young person arrested and detained on charge of minor theft - Whether a single charge of shoplifting was sufficient to arrest a young person to stop him from committing further offences - Detention in police custody - Young person’s rights to be brought to Court promptly - Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, ss 214(1),239(2) - New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Statutes - Interpretation - Young person arrested and detained on charge of minor theft - Power to arrest and detain - Children, Y oung Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, ss 214(1), 239(2) - New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

The defendant, T, was a young person of 14. On 6 May 1998 he was leaving a Superette with two packets of biscuits and one packet of chips without paying. A police officer who happened to be in the Superette, instructed him to stop. T did not. He discarded the food items as he was jumping a property fence, was apprehended, arrested, placed in police custody and charged with shoplifting of goods worth nine dollars. At the time T was the subject of a supervision order relating to 17 charges. T remained in police custody until he was brought to Court, just over 24 hours later. The Youth Advocate questioned the basis of the arrest, the fact that T was not brought to Court and dealt with promptly and the basis of T’s continued detention in police custody. The police submitted that the arrest was necessary to stop T from committing further offences.

Held (finding procedural failures by the police, granting bail to defendant, directing a Family Group Conference and directing that the decision be sent to the appropriate authorities)

(1) The continuation of the arrest unnecessarily was in breach of the letter and the spirit of s 214 of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act (the Act). While the initial arrest might have been justified by the fact that the defendant was trying to escape, the time-frame in question must be the time between the arrest and when the defendant could be brought to Court. The mere fact that the defendant had other charges and was the subject of a supervision order did not mean that he could be arrested whenever he re-offended. A single charge of shoplifting was not such as to suggest that the defendant without arrest would continue shoplifting or commit any other offence.

(2) Failure to bring the defendant to Court constituted a breach of the young person’s rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act to have the matter dealt with on the same day. A person arrested in the morning ought to be dealt with that afternoon except possibly in unusual circumstances.

(3) The fact that the young person had spent 24 hours in police custody including a night in police cells was a serious breach of the law. Given the very limited grounds for the Court to remand a young person in police custody under s 239(2) of the Act, the police should be particularly careful not to hold young persons in custody unnecessarily.

Preliminary question of law

This was a preliminary question of law whereby the Court was asked to rule on the propriety of the defendant’s arrest and continued detention in police custody and the failure to have the defendant brought to Court promptly.