IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA305/2008 [2008] NZCA 415 THE QUEEN ALISTAIR MARK STUART LYON. Robertson, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ
|
|
- Clare Mathews
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA305/2008 [2008] NZCA 415 THE QUEEN v ALISTAIR MARK STUART LYON Hearing: 20 August 2008 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Robertson, Cooper and Winkelmann JJ Appellant in Person M A Woolford for Crown 10 October 2008 at 3.30 pm JUDGMENT OF THE COURT A B C D The appeal is allowed. The sentence imposed in the District Court on the charge of carrying an air gun under s 45(1) of the Arms Act 1983 is quashed and a sentence of 150 hours community work is substituted. The other sentences imposed in the District Court are confirmed. All sentences are to be served concurrently. R V LYON CA CA305/2008 [10 October 2008]
2 REASONS OF THE COURT (Given by Cooper J) [1] Mr Lyon appeals against an effective sentence of 200 hours community work imposed by Judge Sharp in the Auckland District Court. [2] The appellant was sentenced on three charges alleging, respectively carrying an air gun, assault with intent to injure and possession of methamphetamine. On the first of the charges, which was laid under s 45(1) of the Arms Act 1983, the appellant was found guilty after a jury trial. The maximum penalty available was four years imprisonment. The Judge took that as the lead offence. The appellant pleaded guilty to the other two offences which carried potential maximum penalties of one year s imprisonment (assault under s 196 of the Crimes Act) and six months imprisonment (possession of a Class A controlled drug under s 7(1)(a) and 7(2)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975). [3] The sentences imposed were 200 hours community work in respect of the Arms Act charge and 100 hours community work in respect of each of the other two charges, with all terms to be served concurrently. Background [4] The offence of carrying an air gun was committed on 8 September The weapon was in fact a paint ball gun. In her sentencing notes Judge Sharp recounted that Mr Lyon had left his apartment at 7.30 a.m. that morning and as he walked towards a group of shops he pointed the gun at a man who was standing at an ATM machine. The Judge described the offending as probably something in the nature of a practical joke which had been exacerbated by the appellant s drug-induced strange behaviour. The victim was evidently not overly disturbed by the appellant s behaviour on that occasion, regarding it as more odd than frightening. [5] The circumstances of the assault were that at about 6.00 a.m. one Sunday morning in September 2005 Mr Lyon went to a property in Orakei, owned by him,
3 but occupied only by his estranged partner with her two children. He was carrying a samurai sword in a black sheath and a large hunting knife. He was in an agitated state when he entered the premises, and on going into the living area he saw two friends of his former partner, who were sitting there. He told both of them to leave. One of them stood and approached the appellant, who head-butted him in the face twice, causing injury to the victim s lip and forehead. [6] Insofar as the charge of methamphetamine is concerned, the Judge did not have before her a summary of facts and this Court is in the same position. However, she observed that as it was a summary charge the amount of methamphetamine possessed must have been small. She gave credit for the fact that Mr Lyon had agreed to sentencing occurring in the absence of the report, especially as this was against a background of considerable delays in the system that were not attributable to him. The sentence [7] Some of the reasoning behind the sentences imposed was contained in paragraphs [16] [21] of the sentencing notes. The Judge said: [16] He has a large number of convictions. I have seen some old presentence reports about him and it is clear that over at least the last decade he has been the author of his own misfortunes in terms of the addictions that he has suffered from. [17] He has convictions for possession of methamphetamine and indeed other drugs and drug related offences. He does also have convictions for the possession of ammunition, pistol, offensive weapon and explosives. [18] When the Crown does not seek anything other than a communitybased sentence; when so much time has elapsed between the offending and sentencing; when there have been these miscarriages of justice in terms of Mr Lyon continually appearing in Court for sentence and no pre-sentence report being available though no fault of his, it is apparent that a communitybased sentence is all that should be imposed upon him. These are not matters where with the lapse of time I would be interested in, nor would it be justified, to impose a loss of liberty. [20] In addition, Mr Lyon was on bail for much of the period between the offending and the present and for one year of that, was on electronic bail where, as I understand it, he paid for the electronic bracelet out of his own pocket.
4 [21] One year on, very restrictive bail of that type is something that the Court can definitely take into account by way of credit or personal mitigating feature. [8] She concluded that the least restrictive outcome appropriate in the circumstances was to impose the sentences of community work. Arguments on appeal [9] The appellant advanced a number of arguments as to why the sentence was plainly excessive. He referred first to the fact that since the offending he had spent some fifteen months on a farm, subject to electronic bail and a 24 hour curfew. He claimed that during that period he had been attacked with a steel bar, suffered a fractured skull and cheekbone and spent two weeks in intensive care at Auckland hospital. He also claimed to have spent one month in Mt Eden prison on remand in respect of the air gun charge and he relied also on the fact that he had served a 15 month prison sentence (in respect of different offending) after the current offences had been committed. He argued that had these matters been able to be dealt with at the same time, concurrent sentences might have been imposed. [10] He gave an account of the circumstances in which the assault had been committed, explaining in more detail than appears in the Judge s sentencing remarks what happened on the morning in question. He claimed that the victim had had his hands on the hilt of the samurai sword and was trying to lift it off the floor. The assault had occurred in an attempt to break the victim s grip on the sword. None of these matters were mentioned in the summary of facts on which the appellant s guilty plea was entered, and we were not formally asked to receive further evidence. Nevertheless, we have considered what Mr Lyon said about the facts. [11] Finally, the appellant referred to the fact that prior to the sentencing there had been dialogue between the Judge and counsel then instructed, Mr Hart. As a result, Mr Hart had asked the appellant whether he was agreeable to being sentenced in the absence of a pre-sentence report on the basis that there was no risk of any further loss of liberty. The Judge had stated clearly before imposing sentence that there was no question of loss of liberty. The appellant argued that because a sentence of
5 community work would inevitably involve loss of his liberty whilst carrying out the work, the Judge had breached her own assurance. [12] He argued in the circumstances that the appropriate sentence on the charges would have been conviction and discharge. [13] The Crown submitted that the sentences imposed were reasonable. Mr Woolford noted that the Judge had expressly considered the fact that the appellant had spent a period of time on electronic bail and that very restrictive bail conditions should be taken into account by way of reducing the sentence that might otherwise be imposed. As to time spent in custody on remand, it was insufficiently long to warrant any discount on sentence. [14] Mr Woolford also pointed out that the current offending had occurred after the appellant had been sentenced for the offending for which he was responsible in 2002 and The present offending had in fact occurred up to three years later. The only reason that the appellant had been able to advance his argument based on the possibility of concurrent terms was that after he was originally sentenced on 11 February 2004, a Solicitor-General s appeal against the sentence imposed succeeded on 11 July There had been extraordinary delays in scheduling the hearing of that appeal due to the absence of necessary records from the District Court. [15] The result of the appeal was that the sentences of 280 hours community work and 12 months supervision that had originally been imposed in the District Court in respect of offending under the Arms Act 1983 and s 202A of the Crimes Act were replaced by an effective sentence of 15 months imprisonment. The Judge granted leave to apply for home detention. In the course of delivering her judgment, Frater J observed that cumulative sentences were appropriate for offending that occurred four to five months apart in the circumstances of that case. Mr Woolford submitted that here, where the offending had in fact occurred in 2005, it was unlikely that concurrent sentences would have been imposed even if all matters had been before the Court at the same time.
6 Discussion [16] Most of the matters raised by Mr Lyon in support of the appeal lack substance. [17] His argument that he had spent a month on remand on the air gun charge without bail did not appear to be correct. He was evidently in custody initially for a period of about two weeks before bail was granted. There were then occasions when he was arrested for breach of bail and on each occasion bail was renewed after a period of about one week. It would clearly not be appropriate for time spent remanded in custody as a consequence of a breach of bail to be taken into account in reduction of sentence. [18] Of the other matters raised in support of the appeal, as discussed above, the 15 month prison sentence he served was the result of much earlier offending. There was no proper basis upon which that could have been taken into account in fixing the sentence for the present offences. The fact that the appellant was apparently recalled from home detention as a consequence of the laying of the present charges has no implications for the sentences under appeal. [19] As to the appellant s criticism of the Judge for indicating that she would not impose a sentence which involved any further loss of liberty, this reflects a simple misunderstanding by the appellant of what the Judge meant. She was plainly referring to the options available for sentencing judges under the Sentencing Act 2002 which provides for custodial and non-custodial sentences. A sentence of community work falls readily within the category of a non-custodial sentence and would not be aptly described as one involving loss of liberty in the sense that the appellant now asserts. [20] It is plain from Judge Sharp s observations on sentence that she was influenced to a considerable extent by the appellant s previous convictions. They included relevant convictions for possession of methamphetamine as well as other and more serious offending under the Misuse of Drugs Act. As well, there were convictions for disorderly behaviour, assault, possession of a knife in a public place,
7 threatening language and threatening to kill. The Judge was clearly entitled to treat this history as aggravating. [21] The Judge took as the lead offence the charge under s 45(1) of the Arms Act. We have already briefly referred to the Judge s description of this offending but consider it important to consider everything that she said. Her remarks were: [7] The carrying of an air gun was an odd offence. It is clear to me that at the time (that is 8 September 2005) Mr Lyon must have been in the throes of his various addictions for which he has received treatment at the Capri Trust on a residential basis. He was released having successfully sought treatment for addictions approximately one year ago. I am not told, nor do I know independently, of any further problems caused by his addictions that Mr Lyon has had, thus it would appear that his treatment has been successful. [8] In any event, it appears that armed with what I accept was a paint ball gun, Mr Lyon left his apartment at 7:30 am on 8 September 2005 and went downstairs to the little group of shops below his apartment and pointing the gun walked to a man who was standing at an ATM machine there, saying something very odd. He lowered the weapon afterwards, mumbled something and walked off towards a café. [9] It appeared to me, from the evidence of the (shall we say) complainant, that in fact he was not frightened and clearly had a view that Mr Lyon was something of an oddity at the time. [10] He was, as I understand it, apprehended by the police either having a cup of coffee or about to have a cup of coffee that same morning just a few minutes later, probably sublimely unaware of the difficulties that he had caused. [11] I accept that that offending was probably something in the nature of a practical joke, which was exacerbated by whatever addiction he was suffering from at the time. [12] I accept that his behaviour was such as would normally frighten any member of the public who came upon Mr Lyon in such a situation, but I also accept that Mr Lyon meant nothing by the conduct and that there was in fact no danger. [22] Given this description of the Arms Act offending, a sentence of as much as 200 hours community work appears stern, even if the sentence is regarded as having been loaded to reflect the totality of the overall offending for which the appellant was to be sentenced. The Judge did not expressly say that that was the approach she was adopting, but we assume that she was in fact doing so.
8 [23] A sentence of 100 hours community work was imposed in respect of the assault. While we allowed the appellant to give his account of what happened as the background to the offence, and he sought to minimise its impact, the summary of facts on which the appellant s guilty plea was based indicated that he head-butted the victim twice in the face causing injury to his lip and forehead. In our view, the assault was serious, and there could be no criticism of the sentence imposed. [24] The sentence of 100 hours community work was imposed for the offence of possessing methamphetamine. It was not known how much of the drug was in the appellant s possession, although the Judge did say that the amount must have been small. In the absence of further information about the methamphetamine offence we doubt that a sentence of 100 hours was warranted. [25] The final outcome of an effective sentence of 200 hours community work was stern, but within the range available to the Judge having regard to the totality principle. However, a difficulty then arises in relation to the time spent on electronic bail. The Judge said that she took into account the period of time that the appellant had spent on electronic bail, but she did not identify a particular allowance that she made on account of that factor. [26] As cases such as R v Nepe [2008] NZCA 98 show, it can be legitimate to reduce the sentence for this reason, depending on how restrictive the conditions of bail are. Here Mr Woolford did not argue that the Judge had been wrong to describe the conditions that applied as very restrictive or wrong to make an appropriate allowance. The difficulty is that she did not state how much she in fact allowed. She should have done so. The appellant was entitled to a reasonably substantial allowance for this consideration, given that the Judge accepted that the period involved was a year. Having regard to the seriousness of the overall offending and the sentences imposed by the Judge, we consider that an appropriate allowance would be achieved by a 50 hour reduction from the sentence of 200 hours community work otherwise appropriate for the Arms Act offence.
9 Result [27] The appeal is allowed and the sentence imposed in the District Court on the Arms Act offence is quashed. We substitute a sentence of 150 hours community work for that offence. [28] The other sentences imposed in the District Court are confirmed. All sentences are to be served concurrently. [29] The appellant must report to a probation officer at noon on Wednesday 15 October Solicitors: Crown Law Office, Wellington
CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. J U Mooney for Appellant JEL Carruthers for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA297/2017 [2017] NZCA 535 BETWEEN AND CARL KIATIKA NGAWHIKA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 15 November 2017 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Harrison, Lang and
More informationDAVID STANLEY TRANTER Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS, OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985 AND S 203 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. IN THE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 196/97
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 196/97 THE QUEEN v IAN CHARLES PHIPPS Coram: Hearing: Counsel: Gault J Anderson J Robertson J 19 August 1997 (at Auckland) R. Asher QC and J.H. Wiles for Appellant
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND THE QUEEN PETER CHARLES HALLMOND. Fisher J Potter J. W N Dollimore for appellant K Raftery for Crown
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA42/01 THE QUEEN V PETER CHARLES HALLMOND Hearing: 21 June 2001 Coram: Appearances: Blanchard J Fisher J Potter J W N Dollimore for appellant K Raftery for Crown
More informationNOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.
NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA82/2014 [2014] NZCA 304 BETWEEN AND TOESE
More informationRespondent. Counsel: Paul Heaslip for the Appellant Sarah Mandeno for the Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY A193/00 BETWEEN R LYON Appellant AND THE NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Date of hearin g : 14 November 2000 Counsel: Paul Heaslip for the Appellant Sarah
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG PROFESSOR N M HILL QC DEPUTY JUDGE OF THE UPPER TRIBUNAL. Between
IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01503/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Oral determination given following hearing on 7 July 2015 Decision &
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CRI GEORGE MICHAEL SUNNEX Appellant. POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CRI-2010-409-000043 GEORGE MICHAEL SUNNEX Appellant v POLICE Respondent Hearing: 22 April 2010 Appearances: A Bailey for Appellant K Basire for Respondent
More informationAppellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. Winkelmann, Peters and Collins JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA508/2015 [2016] NZCA 138 BETWEEN AND MRINAL SARDANA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 8 March 2016 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Winkelmann, Peters and Collins
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KEKIĆ. Between GLEZIER PALMER-LUIS (ANONYMITY ORDER NOT MADE) and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00604/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 20 July 2017 On 25 July 2017 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 31 March 2016 On 19 April Before
IAC-FH-AR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06365/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 31 March 2016 On 19 April 2016 Before
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CRI [2013] NZHC GARTH ERICH LECHNER Appellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CRI-2013-485-22 [2013] NZHC 1166 GARTH ERICH LECHNER Appellant v NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 21 May 2013 Counsel: D Ewen for Appellant S
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY AP 290/02 BETWEEN PAUL KHAN WHATUIRA A N D NEW ZEALAND POLICE ORAL JUDGMENT OF HAMMOND J
cs6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY AP 290/02 BETWEEN PAUL KHAN WHATUIRA Appellant A N D NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 10 December 2002 Counsel: C Nicholls for Appellant M
More informationTHE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL & ORS Respondents
NOTE: ORDER OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL AND OF THE HIGH COURT PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH RESPONDENTS AND THE SECOND RESPONDENT'S
More informationThe Court of Appeal for Bermuda
Between: The Court of Appeal for Bermuda CRIMINAL APPEAL No 9 of 2015 JOESHUN RUSSELL -v- THE QUEEN Appellant Respondent Before: Baker, President Bell, JA Kawaley, AJA Appearances: Ms. Aura-Lee Cassidy,
More informationDECISION AND REASONS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: IA/17105/2012 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 21 April 2015 On 10 June 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v MCE [2015] QCA 4 PARTIES: R v MCE (appellant) FILE NO: CA No 186 of 2014 DC No 198 of 2012 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal against
More informationAppellant. THE QUEEN Respondent. N M Dutch for Appellant I R Murray and R K Thomson for Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS, OCCUPATION OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF APPELLANT PURSUANT TO S 200 OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011. NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAMES, ADDRESSES, OCCUPATIONS
More informationH.C.Cr. Appeal No. 621 of 2001) ****************************** JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: OMOLO, GITHINJI & DEVERELL, JJ.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 120 OF 2004 BETWEEN ALBANUS MWASIA MUTUA APPELLANT AND REPUBLIC... RESPONDENT (Appeal
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE CRAIG. Between MR ABDUL KADIR SAID. and. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent
IAC-FH-NL-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00950/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Oral determination given immediately following the hearing
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 12, 2014 Session
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 12, 2014 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHARLES GODSPOWER Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Rutherford County No. F-67377 David Bragg,
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA MEDIA SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL FROM The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal DATE 29 September 2015 STATUS Immediate Negondeni
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CRI [2015] NZHC Appellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CRI-2015-404-176 [2015] NZHC 2009 BETWEEN AND HORACE TOHU Appellant NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 24 August 2015 Counsel: M English for the Appellant
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v M [2003] QCA 380 PARTIES: R v M (applicant/appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 92 of 2003 DC No 334 of 2003 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: ORIGINATING COURT: Court of Appeal Appeal
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG Case No: A38/2014 Appeal Date: 4 August 2014 MDUDUZI KHUBHEKA Appellant And THE STATE Respondent JUDGMENT [1]
More informationConduct and Competence Committee. Substantive Meeting. 08 December Nursing and Midwifery Council, George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4LH
Conduct and Competence Committee Substantive Meeting 08 December 2016 Nursing and Midwifery Council, 114-116 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 4LH Name of Registrant: NMC PIN: Part(s) of the register: Bernard
More informationHIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA)
- - ------------------- HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) CASE NO: A200/2016 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: ~ / NO. (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:,$ I NO. (3)
More informationJUDGMENT. [1] In the Court a quo the appellant was refused bail by the Port Elizabeth
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION, PORT ELIZABETH Case no: CA&R15/2016 Date heard: 25 th January 2017 Date delivered: 2 nd February 2017 In the matter between: LUTHANDO MFINI
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT DEFIANCE COUNTY STATE OF OHIO CASE NUMBER v. O P I N I O N
[Cite as State v. Reeder, 2003-Ohio-1371.] COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT DEFIANCE COUNTY STATE OF OHIO CASE NUMBER 4-02-32 PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. O P I N I O N HEATHER J. REEDER DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT. Vincent Olebogang Magano and
THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL OF SOUTH AFRICA JUDGMENT In the matter between: Case no: 849/12 Not reportable Vincent Olebogang Magano and The State Appellant Respondent Neutral citation: Magano v S (849/12)[2013]
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY CRI [2016] NZHC 162. DAVID KEITH SILBY Appellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY CRI-2015-488-000048 [2016] NZHC 162 BETWEEN AND DAVID KEITH SILBY Appellant NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: Appearances: 11 February 2016 (By
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CRI [2013] NZHC Appellant. CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CRI-2013-409-000006 [2013] NZHC 2388 BETWEEN AND CIRCLE K LIMITED Appellant CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: 11 September 2013 Appearances:
More informationAlexander Blackman. In the Court Martial Appeal Court. Judgment. 21 st December 2016
JU Alexander Blackman In the Court Martial Appeal Court Judgment 21 st December 2016 Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ and Sweeney J : 1. The court has before it this afternoon three applications. First an application
More informationS18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. evidence was presented to support a finding of guilt. For the reasons that
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 4, 2019 S18A1609. STANFORD v. THE STATE. BENHAM, Justice. In February 2015, Appellant Larry Stanford was convicted of two counts of malice murder in connection
More informationBefore :
Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWCA Crim 2616 Case No: CAO REF: 201401608 A6 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) ON APPEAL FROM CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT HIS HONOUR JUDGE PONTIUS LOWER NC 201401608
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND CRI [2017] NZDC NEW ZEALAND POLICE Prosecutor. NATHAN PETER CALDER Defendant
EDITORIAL NOTE: NO SUPPRESSION APPLIED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND CRI-2016-004-011072 [2017] NZDC 4653 NEW ZEALAND POLICE Prosecutor v NATHAN PETER CALDER Defendant Hearing: 3 March 2017 Appearances:
More informationIn The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CR. DAVID CARL SWINGLE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
AFFIRM; and Opinion Filed February 27, 2014. S In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-00430-CR DAVID CARL SWINGLE, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from
More informationSENTENCE (subject to editorial corrections)
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Crim 325 Case No: 2016/05551/B1 & 2016/05552/B1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION) ON A REFERENCE FROM THE CRIMINAL CASES REVIEW COMMISSION ON APPEAL FROM A
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND CRI [2017] NZDC FINANCIAL MARKETS AUTHORITY Prosecutor. ANTHONY NORMAN WILSON Defendant
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND CRI-2016-004-012938 [2017] NZDC 18611 FINANCIAL MARKETS AUTHORITY Prosecutor v ANTHONY NORMAN WILSON Defendant Hearing: 12 July 2017 Appearances: O Klaassen for the Prosecutor
More informationPUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.
PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA423/2008 [2008] NZCA 461 THE QUEEN v ZEPPELIN RONNY
More informationJOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA. SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the 6 th December, 2011 and 8 th May, 2012
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR ZAMBIA HOLDEN AT NDOLA (Criminal Jurisdiction) SCZ/103/2011 BETWEEN: JOSEPH MWAMBA KALENGA APPELLANT VS THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT Coram: SAKALA, CJ, MUYOVWE and MUSONDA, JJS On the
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE, A.D. 2006 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2006 BETWEEN: LAURIANO RAMIREZ Appellant AND THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE: The Hon. Mr. Justice Mottley President The Hon. Mr. Justice
More informationMutua Mulundi v Republic [2005] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS Criminal Appeal 23 of 2003 (From Original conviction (s) and Sentence (s) in Criminal Case No. 720 of 2001 of the Resident Magistrate s Court at
More informationPUBLICATION OF NAMES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985.
PUBLICATION OF NAMES OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF COMPLAINANTS PROHIBITED BY S 139 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1985. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA563/2008 [2009] NZCA 145 THE QUEEN v WAYNE ALEXANDER
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG)
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION,
More informationBefore: HIS HONOUR JUDGE BIDDER QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge Between: - and -
Neutral Citation Number: [2011] EWHC 2943 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/7149/2010 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 10/11/2011
More informationBEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2016] NZREADT 78 READT 042/16 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND An application to review a decision of the Registrar pursuant to section 112 of the Real
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE KOPIECZEK. Between. THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Appellant and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01787/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Determination Promulgated On 7 July 2014 On 15 th Aug 2014 Judgment given
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA 385/97 THE QUEEN v CLIFFORD ANDREW RODGER CoramEichelbaum CJ Tipping J Goddard J Hearing 30 April 1998 Counsel H Croft for Appellant S P France for Crown Judgment
More informationASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL
RS and SS (Exclusion of appellant from hearing) Pakistan [2008] UKAIT 00012 ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION TRIBUNAL THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Date of Hearing: 18 December 2007 Before: Mr C M G
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG)
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (NORTH WEST DIVISION,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: R v Hoet [2016] QCA 230 PARTIES: R v HOET, Reece Karaitana (appellant) FILE NO/S: CA No 64 of 2016 DC No 548 of 2016 DIVISION: PROCEEDING: Court of Appeal Appeal against
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA Present: Judges Willis, Annunziata and Bumgardner Argued at Alexandria, Virginia SAMMY D. SULEIMAN OPINION BY v. Record No. 3130-96-4 JUDGE ROSEMARIE ANNUNZIATA FEBRUARY 3,
More informationUpper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) IA/35017/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 10 January 2018 On 11 January Before
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) IA/35017/2015 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision Promulgated On 10 January 2018 On 11 January 2018 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 3 February 2015 On 6 February Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PITT. Between MR SAULIUS VITAS. and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 3 February 2015 On 6 February 2015 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE PITT Between MR
More informationCOUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr M.E SETUMU COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENT : ADV. NONTENJWA
. Reportable: Circulate to Judges: Circulate to Magistrates: Circulate to Regional Magistrates: YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO YES / NO SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses
More informationSUMMARY OF APPEALS CHAMBER SENTENCING JUDGEMENT. The Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic 26 January 2000
SUMMARY OF APPEALS CHAMBER SENTENCING JUDGEMENT The Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic 26 January 2000 The Appeals Chamber of this International Tribunal is now delivering judgement in this matter. Copies of the
More informationJOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA361/2016 [2017] NZCA 69 BETWEEN AND JOHN ARCHIBALD BANKS Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: Court: Counsel: Judgment: 15 February 2017 (with an application
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMPOPO HIGH COURT, THOHOYANDOU HELD AT THOHOYANDOU In the matter between: CASE NO: A15/2012 MPHO SIPHOLI MAKHIGI RAMULONDI KHUMBUDZO First Appellant Second Appellant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY CRI [2016] NZHC CALEB MAX OʼCONNELL Appellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY CRI-2016-412-000014 [2016] NZHC 1692 BETWEEN AND CALEB MAX OʼCONNELL Appellant NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 25 July 2016 Appearances: C C Lynch
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO. APPELLANT S / RESPONDENT S FACTUM (Select One)
C.A. N o A-226-09 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO BETWEEN: TYSON ROY (Appellant) - and - HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondents) APPELLANT S / RESPONDENT S FACTUM (Select One) NAME OF LAW FIRM Address of law firm
More informationTHE QUEEN -v- ASIL NADIR SENTENCING REMARKS 23 AUGUST 2012
THE HON MR JUSTICE HOLROYDE A PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE NORTHERN CIRCUIT IN THE CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT T1992 0238 THE QUEEN -v- ASIL NADIR SENTENCING REMARKS 23 AUGUST 2012 Asil Nadir, you are a man of outstanding
More informationCourt of Criminal Appeals April 22, 2015
Court of Criminal Appeals April 22, 2015 Ehrke v. State No. PD-0071-14 Case Summary written by Kylie Rahl, Staff Member. JUDGE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the court in which JUDGE MEYERS, JUDGE KEASLER,
More informationHIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FRENCH C, KIEFEL, BELL, GAGELER AND KEANE DANG KHOA NGUYEN APPELLANT AND THE QUEEN RESPONDENT Nguyen v The Queen [2013] HCA 32 27 une 2013 M30/2013 ORDER 1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set
More informationFor the appellant : Mrs. K. Simfukwe, Legal Aid Counsel Legal Aid Board
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA SCZ/APPEAL 162/2011 HOLDEN AT LUSAKA (Criminal Jurisdiction) BETWEEN: PATRICK HARA APPELLANT AND THE PEOPLE RESPONDENT CORAM: PHIRI, WANKI, JJS AND LENGALENGA, Ag JS On 9
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN AND
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Mag. Appeal No. 13 of 2011 BETWEEN DAVENDRA OUJAR Appellant AND P.C. DANRAJ ROOPAN #15253 Respondent PANEL: P. WEEKES, J A R. NARINE, J A Appearances: Mr. Jagdeo
More informationBENZILE McDONALD ZWANE B A I L A P P E A L J U D G M E N T. 1]The appellant applied for bail before the Magistrate, Port Elizabeth and his
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) In the matter between: Case No.: CA&R08/2011 Date heard: 12 May 2011 Date delivered: 17 May 2011 BENZILE McDONALD ZWANE Appellant and THE
More informationUpper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) PA/02086/2017 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) PA/02086/2017 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Manchester Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 23 October 2017 On 25 October 2017 Before Deputy
More informationSTATE OF OHIO LAVELLE COLEMAN
[Cite as State v. Coleman, 2008-Ohio-2806.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 89358 STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE vs. LAVELLE COLEMAN
More informationUpper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DC/00014/2016 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DC/00014/2016 Appeal Number: THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Bradford Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 12 March 2018 On 27 April 2018 Before UPPER TRIBUNAL
More informationDISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS
DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANTS REASONS FOR DECISION In the matter of: Mr Mikiel Aurokium Heard on: Friday 16 February 2018 Location: The Adelphi, 1-11 John
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 14 March 2006 On 18 April 2006 Prepared. Before
Asylum and Immigration Tribunal RH (Para 289A/HC395 - no discretion) Bangladesh [2006] UKAIT 00043 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 14 March 2006 On 18 April 2006
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. RALPH E. SMITH, Appellant No. 1229 MDA 2014 Appeal from the Judgment
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE MAY SESSION, 1996
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE MAY SESSION, 1996 FILED October 18, 1996 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9512-CC-00381 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk Appellee,
More informationUpper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DA/00257/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) DA/00257/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at: Field House Decision and Reasons Promulgated On 24 th November 2015 On 11 th December 2015 Before Upper Tribunal
More informationLR (Roma-Remedies-Police Brutality) Romania CG [2002] UKIAT. Appeal No. CC IMMIGRATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL
Heard at FIELD HOUSE On 10th July 2002 BETWEEN: IMMIGRATION APPEAL TRIBUNAL Before: Mr. D. J. Parkes (Chairman) Mrs. E. Hurst J.P. Mr. A. Smith MRS. LINA ROSTAS - and - THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME
More information1/?-l::11 1}~" =,-. In the matter between: IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: A736/2015.
,. IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA) Case number: A736/2015 Date: 1 /;1 bt) 1 =,-. DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1) REPORTABLE: YES/ (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES:
More informationEDITORIAL NOTE: NO SUPPRESSION APPLIED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH CRI [2016] NZDC WORKSAFE Prosecutor
EDITORIAL NOTE: NO SUPPRESSION APPLIED. IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH CRI-2015-009-002051 [2016] NZDC 15032 WORKSAFE Prosecutor v LYTTELTON PORT COMPANY LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 5 August 2016
More informationIN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C CC ) April 10, 1997 Appellee, )
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON JANUARY SESSION, 1997 FILED STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 02C01-9609-CC-00297 ) April 10, 1997 Appellee, ) ) FAYETTE COUNTY Cecil Crowson, Jr.
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P Appellant No WDA 2014
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. SHANE BERNARD VITKA, JR., Appellant No. 1985 WDA 2014 Appeal
More informationTRIBUNAL D APPEL EN MATIÈRE DE PERMIS
LICENCE APPEAL TRIBUNAL Safety, Licensing Appeals and Standards Tribunals Ontario TRIBUNAL D APPEL EN MATIÈRE DE PERMIS Tribunaux de la sécurité, des appels en matière de permis et des normes Ontario Tribunal
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at the Royal Courts of Justice Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 1 st February 2016 On 18 th March 2016.
IAC-CH-SA/LR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/01487/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at the Royal Courts of Justice Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 1 st February 2016
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JAMIL DABNEY Appellant No. 1447 EDA 2016 Appeal from the Judgment
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 18 April 2016 On 3 May Before
IAC-AH-SAR-V1 Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00449/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Royal Courts of Justice Decision & Reasons Promulgated On 18 April 2016 On 3 May
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
[Cite as State v. McClain, 2013-Ohio-2436.] COURT OF APPEALS ASHLAND COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT CITY OF ASHLAND : JUDGES: : : Hon. William B. Hoffman, P.J. Plaintiff-Appellee : Hon. Patricia
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HUTCHINSON. Between BN (ANONYMITY ORDER)
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/06347/2015 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Decision and Reasons Promulgated On 5 January 2016 On 19 January 2016 Before DEPUTY
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Promulgated On 22 December 2014 On 8 January Before DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE HANBURY. Between
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/03806/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 22 December 2014 On 8 January 2015 Before DEPUTY UPPER
More informationAppellant. THE QUEEN Respondent JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The application for an extension of time within which to appeal is granted.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA542/2016 [2017] NZCA 212 BETWEEN AND JOHN SIONA MOALA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 10 May 2017 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Harrison, Gilbert and Katz JJ
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2015 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 19 OF BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF BELIZE AD 2015 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 19 OF 2013 MARVIN CRUZ REYES Appellant v THE QUEEN Respondent BEFORE The Hon Mr Justice Sir Manuel Sosa The Hon Mr Justice Samuel Awich The Hon
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. On 29 October 2014 On 3 November Before. Upper Tribunal Judge Southern. Between FATEH SIAMER. and
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/02423/2013 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at Field House Determination Promulgated On 29 October 2014 On 3 November 2014 Before Upper Tribunal
More informationCircuit Court for Cecil County Case No. 07-K UNREPORTED
Circuit Court for Cecil County Case No. 07-K-07-000161 UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2115 September Term, 2017 DANIEL IAN FIELDS v. STATE OF MARYLAND Leahy, Shaw Geter, Thieme,
More informationAn Appeal from a Notice of Proposal by the Registrar, Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 30, Sch. B - to Refuse Registration
Licence Appeal Tribunal Tribunal d'appel en matière de permis DATE: 2017-06-08 FILE: 10602/MVDA CASE NAME: 10602 v. Registrar, Motor Vehicle Dealers Act 2002 An Appeal from a Notice of Proposal by the
More informationRoyal Courts of Justice London. 7 th April Regina v Maurice Kirk
Criminal Court of Appeal Royal Courts of Justice London Case Number 20104016C1 7 th April 2011 Regina v Maurice Kirk 12 th April 2011 Appeal for a Contempt of Court conviction in Cardiff Crown Court on
More information2. Your conduct in relation to charge 1a took place at Grosvenor Dental Practice where you worked as a dentist.
HEARING HEARD IN PUBLIC AGHAEI, Khosrow Registration No: 75287 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE DECEMBER 2014 Outcome: Fitness to Practise is impaired; erasure with an immediate suspension order Khosrow
More informationcommitting an offence of armed robbery contrary to section 287 (A) of the Penal Code, Cap. 16 of the Laws R.E He was sentenced to thirty
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT MTWARA (CORAM: MUNUO, J.A., MBAROUK, J.A., And BWANA, J.A.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 121 OF 2009 MAULIDI WAJIBU @ HASSANI... APPELLANT VERSUS THE REPUBLIC... RESPONDENT
More informationFREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA. Case no: A119/12
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In a matter between: Case no: A119/12 FANA BEN MSIMANGA APPELLANT And THE STATE RESPONDENT CORAM: C.J. MUSI, J et DA ROCHA-BOLTNEY, AJ JUDGMENT
More informationUNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2015 ARTHUR LAMAR RODGERS STATE OF MARYLAND
UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 2879 September Term, 2015 ARTHUR LAMAR RODGERS v. STATE OF MARYLAND Beachley, Shaw Geter, Thieme, Raymond G., Jr. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned),
More informationNo: D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL. B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE MOSES
Neutral Citation Number: [2012] EWCA Crim 2055 No: 201102990 D4 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION Royal Courts of Justice Strand London, WC2A 2LL Thursday, 14 June 2012 B e f o r e: LORD JUSTICE
More informationTHE IMMIGRATION ACTS. Heard at : Birmingham Magistrates Court Determination Promulgated On : 5 November 2014 On : 11 November 2014.
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: DA/00581/2014 THE IMMIGRATION ACTS Heard at : Birmingham Magistrates Court Determination Promulgated On : 5 November 2014 On : 11 November
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN BENJAMIN MOSOLOMI NSIKI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the appeal of: Appeal No.:A165/2014 BENJAMIN MOSOLOMI NSIKI Appellant and THE STATE Respondent CORAM: MOLEMELA, JP et MURRAY, AJ HEARD
More information