Te Wharenga - New Zealand Criminal Law Review
Not a member yet
43 research outputs found
Sort by
CASE NOTE: S (SC 36/2018) v R [2018] NZSC 124
Full text linkA case note on S (SC 36/2018) v R [2018] NZSC 12
CASE NOTE: H V R [2019] NZSC 69 – APPLICATION OF SECTION 322 OF THE ORANGA TAMARIKI ACT 1989 WHERE THE ACCUSED IS AN ADULT
Full text linkCASE NOTE ON H V R [2019] NZSC 69 – APPLICATION OF SECTION 322 OF THE ORANGA TAMARIKI ACT 1989 WHERE THE ACCUSED IS AN ADUL
CASE NOTE: ZHANG V R [2019] NZCA 507 : INDIVIDUALISED SENTENCING AND A NEW GUIDELINE JUDGEMENT FOR METHAMPHETAMINE-RELATED OFFENDING
Full text linkA discussion of Zhang v R, a guideline judgment for sentencing for methamphetamine-related offendin
CASE NOTE: W (SC 38/2019) V R [2020] NZSC 93 AND ROIGARD V R [2020] NZSC 94 — THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRISON INFORMANT EVIDENCE
Full text linkCASE NOTE ON W (SC 38/2019) V R [2020] NZSC 93 AND ROIGARD V R [2020] NZSC 94 — THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRISON INFORMANT EVIDENC
Taking New Zealand's Specialist Criminal Courts "To Scale" for Better Criminal Justice Outcomes
Full text linkArticle by Olivia Klinku
CRIMINAL RECORDS (EXPUNGEMENT OF CONVICTIONS FOR HISTORICAL HOMOSEXUAL OFFENCES) ACT 2018
Full text linkA review of the CRIMINAL RECORDS (EXPUNGEMENT OF CONVICTIONS FOR HISTORICAL HOMOSEXUAL OFFENCES) ACT 201
Managing Criminal Justice
Full text linkIn a dissenting judgment in 1983, Sir Duncan McMullin said of the criminal law that “[i]t is not important that [it] should be innovative; it is important that it be certain and seen as fair in its application by citizens whose lives it affects”. Well, that was a simpler time perhaps. In the past decade there has been a great deal of innovation in criminal justice. Some of it has been judge-nudged. Most has been enacted by Parliament. In my remarks today I want to raise questions about whether the changes have assisted with the certainty and fairness of criminal justice. I do not attempt answers
Time to Take Brain-Fingerprinting Seriously? A Consideration of International Developments in Forensic Brainwave Analysis (FBA), in the Context of the Need for Independent Verification of FBA’s Scientific Validity, and the Potential Legal Implications of its Use in New Zealand
Full text linkAny investigation into the potential legal application of a new scientific technology to legal contexts is invariably met with diverse perceptions and reactions, covering the range from adamant support, disguised bias, open-minded enquiry, cautious scepticism, outright scepticism, polite dismissal, to vehement rejection. These reactions are amplified when the relevant technology is related to the human brain, due to well-documented differences among many credible researchers about brain functioning and the reliability of inferences that can be drawn from brain-related experiments