Hernan Manzanero v The Queen
| Jurisdiction | Caribbean States |
| Judge | Mr Justice Saunders,Mme Justice Rajnauth-Lee,Burgess,Mr Justice Jamadar,Mr Justice Jamadar, JCCJ,Wit,Rajnauth-Lee |
| Judgment Date | 06 October 2020 |
| Date | 06 October 2020 |
| Docket Number | CCJ Appeal No BZCR2019/001 |
| Court | Caribbean Court of Justice |
[2020] CCJ 17 (AJ) BZ
IN THE CARIBBEAN COURT OF JUSTICE
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
The Honourables: Mr Justice A Saunders, PCCJ
Mr Justice J Wit, JCCJ
Mme Justice M Rajnauth-Lee, JCCJ
Mr Justice A Burgess, JCCJ
Mr Justice P Jamadar, JCCJ
CCJ Appeal No BZCR2019/001
BZ Criminal Appeal No 7 OF 2017
Anthony G Sylvestre for the Appellant
Cheryl-Lynn Vidal SC for the Respondent
AG v Joseph [2006] CCJ 3 (AJ), (2006) 69 WIR 104; Australian National Industries Ltd (in liq) v Spedley Securities Ltd (1992) 9 ACSR 309, (1992) 26 NSWLR 411; Coates v The State of Western Australia [2009] WASCA 142; DeClercq v R [1968] SCR 902; Erven v R [1979] 1 SCR 926; Lassalle v The Attorney-General (1971) 18 WIR 379; Livesey v New South Wales Bar Association [1983] 151 CLR 288, [1985] LRC (Const) 1107; Matter of Ingram 15 Md App 356 (1972); Nixon v State 140 Md App 170 (2001); R v Calaney Flowers [2020] CCJ 16 (AJ) BZ; R v Gauthier [1977] 1 SCR 441; R v Masters (1992) 26 NSWLR 450; R v Nicholas [2000] VSCA 49, (2000) 1 VR 356; R v Sussex Justices Exp McCarthy (1924) 1 KB 256; Re Q (Children) [2014] EWCA Civ 918, [2004] All ER (D) 104; Salazar v R [2019] CCJ 15 (AJ); State v Hutchinson 260 Md 227 (1970); Thurton v R [2018] 2 LRC 125
Belize — Belize Constitution, Rev Ed 2011, Cap 4, ss 6(2), 7, Criminal Procedure Rules 2016, Indictable Proceedings Act, Rev Ed 2011, Cap 96, ss 65A, 65B, 65C, 65D; Saint Lucia — Criminal Procedure Rules 2008, r 11.5(k); Saint Vincent and the Grenadines — Interviewing of Suspects for Serious Crimes Act 2012; Singapore — Criminal Procedure Code, Rev Ed 2012, Cap 68, ss 279(1), 279(8)
Belize Code of Judicial Conduct and Etiquette 2003; The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2002; Commentary on the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct (UNODC), September 2007; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171; Transcript of Proceedings, ( R v Manzanero Supreme Court of Belize, Indictment No C102/2013, 17 March 2017); Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res 217 A(III)
Criminal law — Practice and procedure — Judge alone trials — Credibility of the accused — Voir dire — Whether judge should recuse after hearing voir dire — Fair trial — Test of fairness — Reasonable apprehension of bias — Belize Indictable Procedure Act Chapter 96
The Appellant, Hernan Manzanero (“Manzanero”) was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Belize, mainly on evidence given by his common law wife, Daisy Alvarado (“Daisy”). On 28 November 2011, Manzanero and Daisy, along with their 25-day old baby, boarded the taxi of the deceased, Domiciano Quixchan, at Bullet Tree Village. An incident occurred, which resulted in the death of the deceased, and injuries to Manzanero. Manzanero was subsequently charged with murder. On 7 March 2017, he stood trial before Moore J, sitting without a jury.
Manzanero had given two caution statements to the police. The first was mainly exculpatory and was admitted into evidence. The second statement contained an admission of guilt. A voir dire was held during the trial to assess the admissibility of the second caution statement. After hearing Manzanero's evidence during the voir dire, the trial judge, although finding that Manzanero was not wholly credible, ruled the second caution statement inadmissible.
The Prosecution's case relied almost entirely on Daisy's testimony, that Manzanero used a knife to stab the deceased in his stomach by his ribs and then used a different knife to cut his throat/neck. At the trial Manzanero relied on an unsworn statement from the dock. He denied any responsibility for the attack or the death of the deceased. The trial judge delivered an oral judgment on 3 May 2017 and subsequently delivered a written judgment also dated the 3 May 2017. She found Manzanero guilty of murder.
Manzanero appealed unsuccessfully to the Court of Appeal of Belize, challenging the conviction for murder. The appeal before the Caribbean Court of Justice (“the Court”) focused on the voir dire conducted by the trial judge. The critical issue was whether it could reasonably be said that an adverse finding on Manzanero's credibility, made by the trial judge at the conclusion of the voir dire, resulted in Manzanero having been denied a fair trial.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by Saunders, PCCJ and Rajnauth-Lee, JCCJ. The Court held that accused persons should receive from a judge sitting alone, a trial that appears to be no less fair than they would have received at a jury trial. It did not automatically follow that, in a judge alone trial, where a trial judge has made an adverse finding on the credibility of the accused on the voir dire, or has heard evidence which was prejudicial to or indicative of the guilt of the accused, the accused is denied a fair trial if the judge arrives at a Guilty verdict. An appellate court must, however, be satisfied that the trial judge, in determining the guilt of the accused, did not carry over to her deliberations on the main trial any adverse findings on the credibility of the accused, or was not improperly influenced in arriving at a guilty verdict by evidence which was prejudicial to or indicative of the guilt of the accused, and not ultimately admitted into evidence.
In this case, having ruled on the voir dire and proceeded on the main trial, the trial judge analysed very carefully and thoroughly the evidence of the prosecution. She did not arrive at her fact-finding conclusions only on the basis of the credibility of the sole witness for the prosecution. She properly explained why she accepted Daisy's evidence. The trial judge also accurately and faithfully considered the defence, and in particular, the unsworn statement of the accused. She scrutinized the several matters raised in the statement, explaining why she did not accept it. She continued to bear in mind that Manzanero had nothing to prove. She found that the prosecution evidence had made her feel sure and left her without any reasonable doubt that Manzanero intentionally and without lawful justification caused the fatal harm to the deceased. In the circumstances, the trial judge's analysis of the evidence could not be impeached.
In a concurring judgment Jamadar, JCCJ explored the concept of fairness and the issues of actual bias and apparent bias. Jamadar, JCCJ noted that the relevant test which should lead to disqualification in cases of a reasonable apprehension of prejudgment such as this, is: whether there is a real likelihood that the parties or the public could entertain a reasonable apprehension that the judge would not be able to decide the case impartially, in the context of the alleged pre-judgment and in the particular circumstances of the case.
The appeal was dismissed and the decision of the Court of Appeal to affirm Manzanero's conviction was upheld.
of
The Honourable Mr Justice Saunders, President and
The Honourable Justices Wit, Rajnauth-Lee and Burgess
Delivered by
The Honourable Mr Justice Saunders and The Honourable Mme Justice Rajnauth-Lee
and
CONCURRING JUDGMENT
of
The Honourable Mr Justice Jamadar
on the 6 th day of October 2020
JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE Mr Justice Saunders, PCCJ AND THE HONOURABLE Mme Justice Rajnauth-Lee, JCCJ:
This matter concerns the trial judge's role in non-jury trials and the maintenance of fairness in that trial process. The Appellant, Hernan Manzanero (“Manzanero”) was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Belize, mainly on evidence given by his common law wife, Daisy Alvarado (“Daisy”). The appeal focuses on a voir dire (or trial within the trial) conducted by the presiding judge during the course of Manzanero's trial. The critical issue before the Caribbean Court of Justice (“the Court”) is whether it can reasonably be said that an adverse finding on Manzanero's credibility, made by the trial judge at the conclusion of the voir dire, resulted in the accused having been denied a fair trial. It is on this point that Manzanero challenges the decision of the Court of Appeal to affirm his conviction for murder.
On 28 November 2011, Manzanero and Daisy, along with their 25-day old baby, boarded the taxi of the deceased, Domiciano Quixchan, at Bullet Tree Village. An incident occurred, which resulted in the death of the deceased, and injuries to Manzanero. Shortly after the occurrence of this incident, Manzanero was taken into custody and within days he was charged with murder. On 7 March 2017, he stood trial before Moore J, sitting without a jury, in the Supreme Court of Belize.
Manzanero had given two caution statements to the police. The first was mainly exculpatory and was admitted into evidence. The second statement contained an admission of guilt. A voir dire was held during the trial to assess the admissibility of the second caution statement purportedly voluntarily given by him. After hearing Manzanero's evidence during the voir dire, the trial judge, although finding that Manzanero was not wholly credible, ruled the second caution statement inadmissible. The trial judge continued with the main trial and ultimately found Manzanero guilty of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment with eligibility for parole after 25 years.
Manzanero appealed to the Court of Appeal of Belize, challenging the conviction for murder. The Court of Appeal comprising Sir Manuel Sosa P, Ducille JA and Campbell JA, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence of the trial judge.
Manzanero now appeals to the Court to set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, quash his conviction and order a...
To continue reading
Request your trial