CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v HARRIS [2021] NZHC 897
Because the Court was satisfied on the basis of the health assessor's report and the statutory factors in s 107IAA that Mr Harris poses a high risk of future relevant sexual offending, an extended supervision order for ten years commencing 17 May 2021 was warranted and the Court should direct the Parole Board to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] NZHC 897
- Parties
- Applicant: Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections; Respondent: GUSTAFOHAM HARRIS
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 27 April 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under the Parole Act 2002 for an Extended Supervision Order / Judgment
- Outcome
- Application granted.
- Legal Topics
- Extended Supervision Order, Intensive Monitoring, Risk Assessment, Parole Act 2002
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Applicant
GUSTAFOHAM HARRIS
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application Under the Parole Act 2002 for an Extended Supervision Order / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an extended supervision order should be made under the Parole Act 2002 in respect of Mr Harris
- 2 Whether the Court should order the Parole Board to impose an intensive monitoring condition under s 107IAB
Ratio Decidendi
Because the Court was satisfied on the basis of the health assessor's report and the statutory factors in s 107IAA that Mr Harris poses a high risk of future relevant sexual offending, an extended supervision order for ten years commencing 17 May 2021 was warranted and the Court should direct the Parole Board to impose an intensive monitoring condition for up to 12 months.
Court Disposition
Application granted.
Orders
- An extended supervision order is made against Mr Harris to commence on his statutory release date of 17 May 2021 for a term of 10 years.
- By operation of statute the conditions of the extended supervision order are the standard conditions set out in s 107JA of the Parole Act 2002.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v HARRIS [2021] NZHC 897 [27 April2021]IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALANDINVERCARGILL REGISTRYI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROAWAIHŌPAI ROHECRI-2020-425-000038[2021] NZHC 897UNDER the Parole Act 2002IN THE MATTER of an application pursuant to sections 107Fand 107IAB of the ActBETWEEN CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THEDEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONSApplicantAND GUSTAFOHAM HARRISRespondentHearing: 27 April 2021Counsel: R W Donnelly (via AVL) for ApplicantD J Matthews for RespondentJudgment: 27 April 2021JUDGMENT OF BREWER JSolicitors:Preston Russell Law (Invercargill) for Applicant[1] The applicant applies for an extended supervision order against Mr Harris.Mr Harris does not oppose the application.[2] The purpose of an extended supervision order is to protect members of thecommunity from those who, following receipt of a determinate sentence, pose a realand ongoing risk of committing serious sexual or violent offences.[3] Mr Harris is an offender eligible for an extended supervision order. I amsatisfied, having considered the matters addressed in the health assessor's report dated6 August 2020, that Mr Harris is at high risk of committing a relevant sexual offencein the future. I have satisfied myself that the factors set out in s 107IAA of the ParoleAct 2002 (the Act) apply to Mr Harris.[4] The application is granted. I make an extended supervision order againstMr Harris. The order will commence on his statutory release date of 17 May 2021.The term of the extended supervision order is 10 years. By operation of statute, theconditions of the extended supervision order are the standard conditions set out ins 107JA of the Act.[5] The applicant applies also pursuant to s 107IAB of the Act for an orderrequiring the New Zealand Parole Board to impose an intensive monitoring conditionon Mr Harris. The application is not opposed. Given Mr Harris's history of accostingchildren and offending sexually against them, I am satisfied that I should make theorder.[6] I make an order requiring the Parole Board to impose an intensive monitoringcondition on Mr Harris requiring him to submit to being accompanied and monitored,for up to 24 hours a day, by an individual who has been approved, by a personauthorised by the Chief Executive, to undertake person-to-person monitoring. Themaximum duration of this condition is 12 months.________________________________Brewer J