A defendant's concerns about being deported or prevented from re-entering New Zealand have been allayed by a judge in Queenstown.
After convicting British national Isaac William Harrison (29) in the Queenstown District Court last week, Judge David Saunders agreed to give him a copy of his decision in case he struck trouble re-entering the country in September.
Harrison, an engineer who lives in Kingston, had earlier admitted a charge of careless driving causing injury to Joanna Baldwin, in Kent St, Queenstown, on July 6.
Judge Saunders disqualified him from driving for six months and ordered him to pay $1000 to his victim in reparation for emotional harm.
However, the main focus of the hearing was Harrison's concerns about the potential implications of his conviction on his immigration status.
His counsel, Liam Collins, said an immigration lawyer had told the defendant a conviction might lead to his deportation.
Mr Collins, who initially sought a discharge without conviction, said Harrison was also thinking about cancelling a five-week trip home to the United Kingdom next month because he was worried he would not be allowed back into New Zealand.
Also, his Czech partner was temporarily out of the country, and might not be allowed to return because her visa was linked to his.
But prosecuting Sergeant Ian Collin said the court should be confident Immigration NZ would make a ''proper decision'' when Harrison returned to New Zealand. The defendant's concerns were not grounds for ''giving out discharges without conviction like lollipops''.
Judge Saunders said at least 50% of the people he had dealt with in the court that week were in the country on visas.
The issue of deportation or being unable to re-enter New Zealand was a ''consequence of being in another country''.
But Harrison's offending did not involve aggravating factors such as alcohol or speed, and only factors like dishonesty, violence or drugs were likely to be ''fish hooks'' from an immigration officer's perspective.
The offending had involved a ''momentary lapse of judgement'' and the defendant offered to pay reparation to the victim on the evening of the incident.
He had also agreed to attend two separate restorative justice meetings.
''I would be extremely surprised if an immigration official decided this error of judgement meant he did not meet the good character test.''
At Mr Collins' request, Judge Saunders agreed to give the defendant a copy of his decision so it could be shown to immigration officials upon his return to New Zealand.
It was the second case in Queenstown last week focused on a real or perceived conflict between the court's jurisdiction and immigration officers' power to refuse entry to New Zealand visa holders on the grounds of failing a ''good character'' test.
Another of Mr Collins' clients was turned around by Immigration NZ at Christchurch Airport earlier this month despite being scheduled to appear in the court last week for a discharge without conviction hearing.
