New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Home detention cancellation

Legal area

Court

17 Jun 2021

SEAN PATRICK BRODERICK v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 1918

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1918
Court

High Court

The High Court held that the re-sentencing Judge was entitled to reject discounts for remorse and rehabilitation given the subsequent breach and offending, but erred by failing to allow any discount for personal and cultural factors under s27; applying a 15% adjustment for those factors (in addition to the 25% guilty plea credit) and adding two months for the new offences produced an appropriate global sentence of 19 months' imprisonment, quashing the 23 month sentence and confirming cancellation of the earlier home detention.
12 Jun 2020

R v TAKAMORE [2020] NZHC 1328

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1328
Court

High Court

Because no suitable home detention address was available and the failure to complete home detention was substantially due to circumstances outside the offender's control, the Court cancelled the home detention and substituted a term of imprisonment reflecting the original sentencing intent while crediting the offender for having completed half of the home detention period; remand time will be accounted for by the Department for release but not by the Court in fixing sentence, yielding a substituted sentence of 15 months' imprisonment plus two weeks cumulative for outstanding community work an…
12 Mar 2017

PILLAY v POLICE [2018] NZHC 399

Citation

[2018] NZHC 399
Court

High Court

Judge Hikaka did not err in cancelling home detention and imposing 16 months imprisonment because repeated breaches, poor compliance history and the need for denunciation and deterrence made imprisonment the least inappropriate and proportionate response; appellate intervention was not warranted absent error in discretion.
22 Mar 2016

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v HOLDEN [2016] NZHC 486

Citation

[2016] NZHC 486
Court

High Court

The court granted the Department's application and cancelled the sentence of home detention because the respondent had been offered placement in a residential rehabilitation facility where electronic monitoring could not be maintained, and because the programme concludes shortly before sentence expiry making a further pre-sentence report pointless; the respondent was warned that any failure to comply would result in return to court.
12 May 2015

HAWKINS v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2015] NZHC 1001

Citation

[2015] NZHC 1001
Court

High Court

Period in custody between lodging of an application to cancel home detention under s80F and the court's determination does not constitute pre-sentence detention under ss90 and 91 Parole Act and therefore cannot be credited as time served for parole calculation; however, any period of remand custody that occurred prior to the original sentencing and related to the same charges does constitute pre-sentence detention and may be credited when calculating release dates for a substitute sentence of imprisonment imposed under s80F; habeas corpus relief was not granted immediately because factual pro…

New Zealand Case Law

SEAN PATRICK BRODERICK v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 1918

R v TAKAMORE [2020] NZHC 1328

PILLAY v POLICE [2018] NZHC 399

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS v HOLDEN [2016] NZHC 486

HAWKINS v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2015] NZHC 1001