MCMASTER v R [2015] NZCA 466
The Court exercised its discretion to grant an extension of time because the matter could be dealt with on the papers and, because co-accused had received sentence reductions and the Crown accepted parity, the appellant's sentence was reduced by 11 months and substituted to 12 years and one month to achieve parity.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] NZCA 466
- Parties
- Appellant: Paul Antony McMaster; Respondent: The Queen
- Court
- Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 29 September 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal Against Sentence and Conviction / Court of Appeal Determination on Extension of Time and Sentence Adjustment
- Outcome
- Extension of time granted; appeal allowed; original sentence of 13 years' imprisonment quashed and substituted with 12 years and one month's imprisonment
- Legal Topics
- Parity in Sentencing, Extension of Time, Sentence Substitution, Conviction Quashed
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paul Antony McMaster
Appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence and Conviction / Court of Appeal Determination on Extension of Time and Sentence Adjustment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether to grant extension of time for appeal against sentence
- 2 Whether sentence should be reduced to achieve parity with co-accused after partial successful appeals against convictions
- 3 What is the appropriate substituted sentence
Ratio Decidendi
The Court exercised its discretion to grant an extension of time because the matter could be dealt with on the papers and, because co-accused had received sentence reductions and the Crown accepted parity, the appellant's sentence was reduced by 11 months and substituted to 12 years and one month to achieve parity.
Court Disposition
Extension of time granted; appeal allowed; original sentence of 13 years' imprisonment quashed and substituted with 12 years and one month's imprisonment
Orders
- Extension of time to appeal granted
- Appeal allowed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
DRAFTMCMASTER v R [2015] NZCA 466 [29 September 2015]NOTE: PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OFCOMPLAINANT PROHIBITED BY S 139 OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICEACT 1985.IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALANDCA369/2015[2015] NZCA 466BETWEEN PAUL ANTONY MCMASTERAppellantAND THE QUEENRespondentCourt: Harrison, Dobson and Gilbert JJCounsel: R M Mansfield for AppellantJ E L Carruthers for RespondentJudgment:(On the papers)29 September 2015 at 11.45 amJUDGMENT OF THE COURTA The application for an extension to time to appeal is granted.B The appeal is allowed. The sentence of 13 years' imprisonment is quashed. A sentence of 12 years and one month's imprisonment is substituted.____________________________________________________________________REASONS OF THE COURT(Given by Dobson J)[1] We have considered the joint memorandum of counsel dated 24 August 2015 and are satisfied that the present application can be dealt with on the papers.[2] The application is for a reduction in Mr McMaster's sentence following apartially successful appeal against conviction. Mr McMaster is out of time for any appeal against sentence and accordingly an extension is required.[3] In November 2012, Mr McMaster and three co-accused were sentenced on convictions for sexual violation by rape. They had each been convicted of one count as a principal, and three counts as a party to rape.[4] Appeals by Mr McMaster and three co-accused were partially successful to the extent that their convictions for being a party to three counts of sexual violation by rape were quashed.1[5] Following the appeals against conviction, those three co-accused have allpursued successful sentence appeals. In the case of Dylan John O'Neill and Corey Clinton Owens, this Court substituted sentences of 12 years and nine months'imprisonment with sentences of 11 years and 10 months in each case.2 A third co- accused, Samuel Owen Weenink, then made separate application and, adopting the reasoning in its earlier decision, this Court similarly reduced Mr Weenink's sentence from 12 years and nine months to 11 years and 10 months' imprisonment.3[6] Mr McMaster's culpability was treated by the sentencing Judge as marginallygreater than the others, resulting in an end sentence that was three months longer than the others. The Crown accepts that parity requires Mr McMaster's sentence to be reduced by the same extent as that determined by this Court for the co-accused. We agree.[7] Accordingly, the application for an extension of time to appeal is granted, and the appeal is allowed. The sentence of 13 years' imprisonment is quashed. Asentence of 12 years and one month's imprisonment is substituted. The reduction of11 months achieves parity of treatment with the co-accused.Solicitors:Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent1 Morton v R [2013] NZCA 667.2 O'Neill v R [2014] NZCA 466.3 Weenink v R [2014] NZCA 559.