A murder conviction against an Oamaru teenager was quashed because the Appeal Court ruled comments made during the prosecution's closing argument in his 2011 trial caused a miscarriage of justice.
Yesterday, the Otago Daily Times obtained the full Appeal Court judgement, which was suppressed when it ordered a retrial for Daniel Ethan Smith (now 20) for slashing at, then stabbing Oamaru teenager William Lewis (16) three times in his back during an altercation in Exe St, Oamaru, about 9.45pm on April 1, 2010.
At the retrial in July, Smith was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter and was sentenced on Friday to five years, nine months in jail.
The sentence caused outrage from William's family and friends.
Having already served about four years five months since his arrest and in prison for his original sentence at the first trial of life imprisonment with a minimum of 10 years before parole, Smith is now eligible for parole or would be released by the end of next year if he serves the full manslaughter sentence.
In September last year, Smith appealed his conviction for murder and the sentence of life imprisonment.
The Appeal Court, in the ruling by Justices Paul O'Regan, Ellen France and John Wild, suppressed all details of the proceedings and its judgement until Smith's retrial was complete, which occurred on Friday with his sentencing.
Smith, through counsel Chris Stevenson, appealed his life imprisonment sentence and two issues with his first trial - self-defence and whether he had murderous intent when he stabbed William.
He also appealed against evidence from a cellmate that he confessed, evidence by eye-witness and William's friend Donovan Smith (no relation to Daniel Smith), and misconduct in statements made by the prosecutor in his closing argument.
While critical of some of the summing up by the prosecution, the court found only one issue on which it quashed the conviction - the jury being invited by the prosecutor to infer Smith was guilty because he did not disclose self-defence until he gave evidence at the first trial.
Because the conviction was quashed, the court did not have to deal with the appeal whether the life sentence was excessive and inappropriate.
The court had considered five issues raised in term of the prosecution's conduct.
These were inviting the jury to infer guilt from Smith's silence before the trial (particularly his subsequent claim of self-defence), exceeding established constraints in a summing up (giving his own views or feelings), Smith lying to hide guilt, a comment in his opening about Smith being involved in an altercation with a knife two weeks prior to stabbing William and saying Smith had a duty to retreat from the altercation that led to the stabbing.
The court found a miscarriage of justice made out only by the prosecution inviting the jury to infer guilt from Smith's silence before the trial about self-defence.
However, it was critical of the prosecution's conduct in respect of the four other matters in his closing argument, but these did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice.
''Taken together, the other four grounds of prosecutorial misconduct marginally bolster our conclusion that there was a miscarriage of justice at [Smith's] trial,'' the judgement's summary said.
