New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

First strike warning

Legal area

Court

15 Dec 2020

R v LINGMAN [2020] NZHC 3312

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3312
Court

High Court

The Court set a seven year starting point for the GBH offence, uplifted that by two years to reflect the two ill-treatment/neglect charges (total starting point nine years or 108 months), applied a 15% (16 months) reduction for cultural/personal mitigating factors and a 10% (11 months) reduction for a late guilty plea, producing an end sentence of 81 months (six years nine months) imprisonment; convictions entered on all counts; ill-treatment/neglect counts sentenced to three years each to be served concurrently; first strike warning given.
18 Oct 2019

R v SANTOS [2019] NZHC 2670

Citation

[2019] NZHC 2670
Court

High Court

The appropriate sentence was determined by fixing a 10-year starting point based on the combination and severity of aggravating features (pre-planning, jealousy, extreme and repeated stabbing causing life-threatening injuries, victim vulnerability, lethal weapon), reducing that by 25% for personal mitigation (15% youth, 5% rehabilitation potential, 5% remorse) and a further 20% for guilty plea, resulting in an end sentence of 6 years' imprisonment; a first-strike warning was given regarding future serious violent offending.
24 May 2019

HENARE v R [2019] NZHC 1153

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1153
Court

High Court

The Judge's starting point of three years and three months was within the appropriate range after applying Mako principles adjusted for aggravated burglary; the discounts applied (remorse/youth/restorative engagement and early guilty plea) were appropriate and generous; the Judge considered EM bail and given its short duration no additional reduction was warranted, therefore the sentence of 27 months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed.
29 Nov 2018

R v NATHAN [2018] NZHC 3111

Citation

[2018] NZHC 3111
Court

High Court

Where the defendant was an important and willing participant but not a full participant and lacked knowledge of the firearm and intended tying up of victims, the defendant's culpability is reduced relative to principals; applying Mako guideline a five year starting point was appropriate, uplift of four months applied for offending while subject to a previous sentence, and discounts were applied for genuine remorse and rehabilitation (nine months), impact on dependent children (three months), and a guilty plea discount limited to eight months, resulting in an overall sentence of three years an…
29 Jun 2018

R v TORU [2018] NZHC 1598

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1598
Court

High Court

Applying R v AM, the rapes were placed in band two with a starting point of 11 years 6 months; an uplift was applied for separate violent and detention offending on 21 July, and a cumulative stand-alone sentence of 15 months imposed for attempting to pervert the course of justice; after applying the totality principle reductions the effective total sentence is 12 years 9 months' imprisonment; no minimum period of imprisonment was imposed because rehabilitation prospects and complainant support justified not deferring parole consideration.
9 Jun 2017

KAUVAI v R [2017] NZCA 241

Citation

[2017] NZCA 241
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the sentencing Judge did not err: he confined his assessment to facts relevant to the convicted offending, the starting point of 34 months (2 years 10 months) was within the available range given the aggravating features, the remorse discount of two months was reasonable, the concurrent 18‑month sentence for the lesser charge was not manifestly excessive, and the first strike warning was not quashed because only the sentencing judge has jurisdiction under s 180 to quash such a warning.

New Zealand Case Law

R v LINGMAN [2020] NZHC 3312

R v SANTOS [2019] NZHC 2670

HENARE v R [2019] NZHC 1153

R v NATHAN [2018] NZHC 3111

R v TORU [2018] NZHC 1598

KAUVAI v R [2017] NZCA 241