New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Failure to stop

Legal area

Court

17 Oct 2023

PEARSE v POLICE [2023] NZHC 2900

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2900
Court

High Court

The appellant's 23 June 2018 conviction was entered under the mistaken belief it was a third or subsequent s52A offence; prior convictions pre‑dating insertion of s52A do not qualify to escalate penalties under s52A(5); the plea was entered without appreciation of the true nature of the charge, constituting a miscarriage of justice, therefore the 2018 conviction is quashed and substituted with a conviction under s52A(1)(a)(ii) and s52A(3) and a six‑month disqualification imposed; consequentially the Aug and Sep 2020 convictions for driving while disqualified are set aside and acquittals enter…
21 Sept 2023

AFFLECK v POLICE [2023] NZHC 2643

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2643
Court

High Court

The High Court held the aggregate starting point of 30 months was within range given multiple recent incidents, high breath alcohol readings, dangerous driving and extensive recidivism; the two-year effective custodial sentence was not manifestly excessive and imprisonment was necessary for denunciation, deterrence and community protection; the appellant's ADHD did not render imprisonment disproportionately severe and leave to apply for home detention was not warranted.
22 Mar 2022

GILLIES v R [2022] NZHC 534

Citation

[2022] NZHC 534
Court

High Court

The High Court held the sentencing Judge did not err in cancelling the disputed facts hearing and in treating offending while on bail as an aggravating factor, found no impermissible double counting of prior convictions, but concluded the Judge failed to apply an appropriate guilty plea discount to the two Napier charges; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part by quashing the Napier sentences and remitting them for re-sentencing while confirming the 12 month sentence and 12 month disqualification on the five aggravated careless driving charges.
14 Dec 2021

WESTALL v R [2021] NZHC 3440

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3440
Court

High Court

The High Court held the sentencing Judge erred in requiring a direct causal link between background (s27) factors and offending but did not err in the quantum of discounts awarded overall; reduction of the guilty plea discount from 20% to 15% was justified by an unreasonable disputed facts hearing stance; the end sentence of two years six months' imprisonment was within range and not manifestly excessive, so the appeal is dismissed.
6 Dec 2021

GRIFFIN v R [2021] NZHC 3317

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3317
Court

High Court

The High Court dismissed the appeal. The starting point for the methamphetamine offending was within range given the appellant's active role as a street-level dealer; the 15% personal mitigation discount applied by the District Court was generous and should not have been extended across all offending; no additional discount for remorse or rehabilitation was warranted; no further totality adjustment was required; the end sentence of five years' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and was affirmed.
10 Sept 2021

HALLMOND v R [2021] NZHC 2369

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2369
Court

High Court

On a plain reading s52A(5) applies only to convictions for a third or subsequent offence "against subsection (1)" of s52A; convictions under predecessor provisions entered before s52A was enacted do not qualify absent an express deeming or carry-over provision; therefore the mandatory two-year disqualification under s52A(5) did not apply to the appellant and the two-year disqualification was quashed and substituted with a cumulative six-month disqualification under s52A(3).
9 Jun 2021

MARTIN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 1356

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1356
Court

High Court

Section 52A(5) must be read according to its plain words and requires prior convictions under s 52A(1); s 22 of the Interpretation Act does not apply because s 52A does not apply or refer to a repealed enactment or replaced provision that would trigger deeming; in absence of express carry‑over Parliament's omission must be respected; therefore the appellant's conviction was unsustainable and the appeal is allowed.
17 Dec 2020

SLADE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3396

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3396
Court

High Court

Sentencing judges must deduct pre-sentence custodial remand from the nominal imprisonment term before commuting that term to home detention; full equivalence for remand time is the norm. Applying that principle here, five months' remand required reduction of the commuted home detention so the six months' home detention was quashed and replaced with one month; the Judge's starting point was within the available range and not manifestly inadequate.
1 May 2020

BANKS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 859

Citation

[2020] NZHC 859
Court

High Court

The Court corrected a mathematical error in the District Court's starting point (from 4 years 7 months to 4 years 4 months), upheld the appropriateness of most uplifts (theft, deception, drug charges, failure to answer bail, reckless driving), avoided double counting by reducing some uplifts, accepted a 10% discrete discount for addiction and traumatic background on persuasive report evidence and a 20% guilty plea discount, and concluded the correct final sentence is three years' imprisonment served cumulatively on the existing sentence; the appeal was therefore allowed and the original 3 yea…
27 Jun 2019

BORELL v POLICE [2019] NZHC 1483

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1483
Court

High Court

The High Court accepted the s 27 report disclosed substantial mitigating personal, familial and cultural deprivation causally linked to the offending, warranting a significant personal circumstances discount; a 30% reduction was appropriate on the lead offence, reducing the sentence to 22 months, and leave was granted to apply for home detention under s 80I subject to availability and suitability of placement and address.