R v HEWITT [2017] NZHC 1220

R v HEWITT [2017] NZHC 1220

Court found the two incidents constituted a connected spree of similar offending and imposed concurrent sentences; identified aggravated robbery of Ms Watson as lead offence with a starting point of 5 years 9 months (including 3 month uplift for car conversion), uplifted 2 years 3 months for the offences against Ms Aitcheson to reach an overall starting point of 8 years, added 6 months uplift for prior convictions resulting in an effective sentence of eight years and six months' imprisonment on the lead count, imposed specified concurrent sentences on lesser counts, refused to impose a Minimum Period of Imprisonment, and ordered destruction of the weapons and drug paraphernalia.

Citation
[2017] NZHC 1220
Parties
Crown: The Queen; Prisoner: Bronson Hewitt
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal (jury Trial) / Sentencing
Outcome
Defendant convicted after jury trial and sentenced. Lead count aggravated robbery: eight years and six months' imprisonment; other sentences imposed concurrently as specified; no minimum period of imprisonment imposed; order for destruction of weapons and drug paraphernalia.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Kidnapping, Assault, Unlawful Taking of Motor Vehicle, Minimum Period of Imprisonment, Totality Principle, Concurrent Sentencing, Drug‑fuelled Offending, Destruction of Exhibits
Criminal Law Sentencing Law Robbery Kidnapping Assault Unlawful Taking of Motor Vehicle Minimum Period of Imprisonment Totality Principle +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Crown

Bronson Hewitt

Prisoner

Procedural Posture

Criminal (jury Trial) / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 proper starting point for aggravated robbery and related offences
  2. 2 application of totality and concurrent sentencing under s84‑85 Sentencing Act 2002
  3. 3 whether a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) under s86 Sentencing Act should be imposed

Ratio Decidendi

Court found the two incidents constituted a connected spree of similar offending and imposed concurrent sentences; identified aggravated robbery of Ms Watson as lead offence with a starting point of 5 years 9 months (including 3 month uplift for car conversion), uplifted 2 years 3 months for the offences against Ms Aitcheson to reach an overall starting point of 8 years, added 6 months uplift for prior convictions resulting in an effective sentence of eight years and six months' imprisonment on the lead count, imposed specified concurrent sentences on lesser counts, refused to impose a Minimum Period of Imprisonment, and ordered destruction of the weapons and drug paraphernalia.

Court Disposition

Defendant convicted after jury trial and sentenced. Lead count aggravated robbery: eight years and six months' imprisonment; other sentences imposed concurrently as specified; no minimum period of imprisonment imposed; order for destruction of weapons and drug paraphernalia.

Orders

  • Aggravated robbery – eight years and six months' imprisonment (lead sentence).
  • Kidnapping – two years' imprisonment, to be served concurrently.