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

Police v JL (3 February 2006) YC, Wellington, CRI 2005-285-93, Judge I G Mill

Name: Police v JL
Unreported:
File number: CRI 2005-285-93
Court: Youth Court
Location: Wellington
Date: 3 February 2006
Judge: Mill DCJ
Charge: Robbery
CYPFA: s282
Key title: Databank Compulsion Order; Discharge – s282; Orders – Discharge – s282

Summary: JL charged with robbery; not denied; charge “proved by admission at FGC”; Informant issued notice under Criminal Investigations (Bodily Samples) Act 1995 (“CIBSA”); JL discharged pursuant to s282 CYPFA; JL challenged CIBSA notice and sought hearing. (1) Whether there was a “finding” by the Youth Court that the charge was proved; (2) whether the words “deemed never to have been laid” in s282(2) CYPFA mean that the conviction has been quashed in terms of s40 CIBSA.

(1) Term “conviction” not normally used in Youth Court but s2 CIBSA defines “conviction” to include: “a finding, by a Youth Court, that a charge against a young person is proved.” Discussion of what amounts to a finding in the Youth Court – whether “not denied”, “admitted”, or a formal guilty plea are necessary. C v Police (2000) 19 FRNZ 357 Hammond J; Police v B (2001) NZFLR 585 McElrea DCJ discussed. Guilty plea required in s283(o) CYPFA cases but this does not assist in determining a CIBSA case. Police v M (2001) 20 FRNZ 199 Harding DCJ; Police v S (2000) NZFLR 199 Ryan DCJ discussed. Section 281 and s246 CYPFA contain no statutory requirement that charge must be proved prior to a s282 discharge. Police v M followed. The entry on the record by the Judge of an admission is a “finding” and a “conviction” in terms of the CIBSA. “A “finding” can be made quite independently from a subsequent discharge, as happened in this case when a discharge was not agreed at the FGC when the admission was made. Held: There was a “conviction” in terms of the CIBSA in this case.

(2) Whether a subsequent s282 discharge amounts to the conviction being “quashed” pursuant to section 40 CIBSA. Section 282(2) CYPFA: “An information discharged under subsection (1) of this section shall be deemed never to have been laid”. Informant argues s281 of CYPFA requires that a charge must be proved before a s282 discharge may be given. This is incorrect as s281 requires proof only where orders are to be made under s282(3). Meaning of “quash” discussed; parallels drawn between s282 discharge and s106 Sentencing Act 2002 discharge without conviction, also s19 of Criminal Justice Act in Police v S (supra). Police Act 1958, s57; Children Young Persons and Their Families Amendment Bill (No. 4) cl 23 discussed. Youth justice jurisdiction a “peculiar animal”; principles of accountability, rehabilitation and presumption against proceedings being initiated must be tempered by need to protect public.

Held: Unique wording of s282(2) CYPFA can only have one meaning in this context. “Deemed never to have been laid” is very strong language indeed and it is sufficiently clear that the charge has been quashed, annulled, or made null or void. When this happens after the notice but before the sample is taken then the notice is of no effect (s42(1)).

Decision: Databank compulsion notice is of no effect.