New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Breach of bail

Legal area

Court

28 Sept 2023

TE KAAWA v R [2023] NZHC 2708

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2708
Court

High Court

The High Court held the starting point of five years six months imprisonment (five years six months before mitigation) was within the available range for the aggravated robbery given the aggravating features, but the specific four-month uplift for the stolen vehicle was unnecessary as that factor was already reflected in the starting point; the EM bail credit of just under 40% was within range given breaches; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part and the sentence reduced from two years four months to two years two months imprisonment on the aggravated robbery charge.
8 Sept 2021

DAWSON v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2340

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2340
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court did not err in adopting a four year starting point because the robbery had the hallmarks of a home invasion (disguise, premeditation, violence, confrontation of a child); the uplift for additional offending should be reduced so that combined uplifts for prior convictions and offending on bail total six months (not nine), because the offender's methamphetamine addiction materially causally linked to much dishonesty; the 15% discount for personal mitigation was appropriate; appeal allowed in part and original 3 years 6 months sentence quashed and replaced…
18 Aug 2021

WALKER v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2149

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2149
Court

High Court

The starting point of more than three months for the breach of prison release conditions was excessive given the single breach and prior compliance, and an additional uplift for previous convictions double‑counted factors already reflected in the offence assessment; the appropriate global sentence before mitigation was nine months and, after applying a 25% guilty plea discount, the correct end sentence is six months three weeks on the lead charge, so the appeal is allowed and the ten‑month sentence is quashed and substituted accordingly.
13 Aug 2021

R v PALMER EDWARD MARSTERS [2021] NZHC 2117

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2117
Court

High Court

The Court found multiple aggravating features (use of weapon, offending while on bail, victim vulnerability, extent of harm) but concluded the facts did not satisfy the high threshold in s104(1)(e) for brutality/cruelty/depravity or callousness; the defendant was entitled to the maximum guilty plea discount of two years and a modest six-month mitigation for personal/cultural/mental health factors was appropriate, resulting in a final MPI of 12 years on the murder conviction; other sentences imposed concurrently and reports to Corrections ordered to assist rehabilitation.
12 Jul 2021

WILLOUGHBY v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 1740

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1740
Court

High Court

The appeal was dismissed because the pre-sentence report and professional objections showed the proposed home detention address was unsuitable (Oranga Tamariki and Police concerns), the appellant presented a high risk of reoffending and a documented history of non-compliance with community-based sentences (including cutting an EM bracelet and absconding), and therefore no sentence less than imprisonment could adequately achieve denunciation, deterrence and protection of the community in the present circumstances.
24 Nov 2020

ALEFAIO v DISTRICT COURT AT WAITAKERE [2020] NZHC 3118

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3118
Court

High Court

The Magistrate did not breach the separation of powers or natural justice by indicating bail should be reconsidered and adjourning to hear counsel; that was a lawful exercise of judicial discretion under s7(5) of the Bail Act and did not amount to pre-determination. The judicial review is dismissed on the merits.
25 Aug 2020

GARDNER v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 2169

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2169
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed because the end sentence imposed was above the available range due to cumulative uplifts applied without adequate consideration of totality (and an arithmetical error); substituted sentence of one year nine months imprisonment was ordered, no additional discount for remorse was given, and the short period on EM bail did not warrant further reduction.
15 Jun 2020

R v TAMIHANA [2020] NZHC 1365

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1365
Court

High Court

Given the nature and seriousness of the attempted murder, the Court set a starting point of six years six months, allowed a 15% (one year) discount for established mental illness and related mitigation, a further 15% for cultural factors and restorative justice engagement, and a 20% discount for an early guilty plea, resulting in a determinate sentence of three years eight months imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 22 months; non‑custodial supervision was rejected as insufficient given the gravity, violence, victim vulnerability and need for denunciation and protection.
7 May 2020

KURA v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 939

Citation

[2020] NZHC 939
Court

High Court

The Court corrected the District Court's calculation, accepted a reduced valuation for the stolen phones but found the appellant's culpability and related offending justified the uplifts applied by the Judge; minimal mitigation was appropriate and no credit was given for alleged assistance because police derived no benefit; accordingly the appeal is allowed in part, the sentence reduced from 28 months to 25 months' imprisonment and reparation for the phones reduced to $3,750.
2 Oct 2019

WOODMASS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2019] NZHC 2503

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2503
Court

High Court

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, holding the District Court erred in declining any youth discount; a 15% youth discount was appropriate despite findings of antisocial personality disorder, the burglary starting point was not out of range, and the substituted global sentence is one year and ten months' imprisonment after applying the youth discount and the guilty plea discount.