New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Male assaults female

Legal area

Court

4 Aug 2023

R v RAWHITI [2023] NZHC 2068

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2068
Court

High Court

Court fixed an overall starting point of 13 years' imprisonment (11 years for manslaughter uplifted by 2 years for offending against the mother), applied specified percentage discounts (20% manslaughter guilty plea at time of offer, 10% for partner charges guilty plea, 5% remorse on manslaughter, 10% for adverse background) and 9 months credit for EM bail, yielding an end sentence of 8 years' imprisonment for manslaughter with concurrent terms of 3 years for injuring with intent and 1 year for male assaults female, total effective sentence 8 years.
24 Jul 2023

35fab58b-a1e5-4ca3-bc5b-fcc03fc69eb6.pdf

Citation

openlaw-b7275eea_d6df_40c9_b43f_cdf90bdb77e4.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the starting point of two years six months for strangulation was available given the aggravating features (victim vulnerability, breach of a protection order, aggravated violence, enduring harm and presence of the child); an eight‑month uplift for the additional offences was justified and, applying the totality principle, the combined sentence of two years four months was not manifestly excessive, so the appeal was dismissed.
26 May 2023

R v FALAMOE [2023] NZHC 1268

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1268
Court

High Court

Apply R v AM banding using Ms M as lead offending (band 2) with a starting point of 11 years, uplift 1.5 years for separate offending against Ms H and a further 6 months for offending against children, yielding a finite determinate sentence of 13 years; decline preventive detention because risk at sentence end was not sufficiently high and could be mitigated by treatment; impose a minimum period of imprisonment of five years six months to denounce conduct and hold accountable.
11 May 2023

FRASER v R [2023] NZHC 1114

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1114
Court

High Court

The Court reduced the lead starting point to three years' imprisonment, allowed a 12‑month uplift for related assaults (yielding a 4‑year adjusted starting point), and affirmed that prior consensual intercourse did not mitigate culpability once the victim withdrew consent and the offender acted to prevent her leaving; ASD explains some initial failures to perceive cues but did not mitigate culpability for the subsequent deliberate acts (pushing, shutting door, verbal statements); applying a 25% guilty plea credit and 25% aggregate personal mitigation (15% for ASD and 10% for character/treatme…
6 Sept 2022

JONES v R [2022] NZCA 416

Citation

[2022] NZCA 416
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal was allowed because the District Court's cumulative starting points and limited totality adjustments produced an aggregate sentence disproportionate to the overall criminality; the Court substituted reduced starting points and applied larger discrete discounts for personal mitigation and guilty pleas and restructured sentences to run concurrently for the violent offending, yielding substituted sentences that reflect totality and rehabilitation objectives.
16 May 2022

R v MENO [2022] NZHC 1062

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1062
Court

High Court

The Judge erred in principle by giving credit for pre-sentence remand (prohibited by s 82 Sentencing Act), by allowing an excessive combined discount for remorse, rehabilitation and cultural factors without robust causal nexus, and by crediting time on EM bail despite offending while on bail; because those errors produced a non-custodial home detention outcome that was not available, the Crown appeal was allowed and the home detention sentence was set aside and replaced with an appropriately quantified custodial sentence.
7 Dec 2021

R v PENE [2021] NZHC 3327

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3327
Court

High Court

Adopted a seven-year starting point for manslaughter reflecting concealed knife, unarmed victim and inherently lethal stabbing; applied total 40% reduction (25% guilty plea, 10% mental health/FASD mitigation, 5% youth) producing a term of four years two months with a 50% minimum period of two years one month; assault sentence of three months to be concurrent; directed Parole Board be provided mental health reports and lifted interim name suppression.
21 Sept 2021

R v MANE [2021] NZHC 2511

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2511
Court

High Court

The Court fixed individual starting points (group one unlawful possession and related offences 2 years 6 months; wounding with reckless disregard 3 years 6 months; male assaults female 6 months), ordered appropriate concurrency and cumulation (first group concurrent, wounding cumulative, male assaults concurrent with wounding), applied reductions for guilty plea (15%), youth (10%), s27 cultural matters (10%) and remorse (5%) totalling 40%, resulting in an overall sentence of three years' imprisonment and cumulative driving disqualifications (6 months + 12 months).
7 May 2021

PHILLIP DALE JOHNSON v R [2021] NZCA 171

Citation

[2021] NZCA 171
Court

Court of Appeal

Appellant received a fair trial. Counsel had reasonably prepared and had not been instructed to produce the video pre-trial; the cellphone recording, when viewed, was neither fresh nor cogent and did not exonerate appellant (audio showed appellant verbally aggressive and did not exclude appellant striking the victim); restricted access to medication did not impair appellant's ability to give coherent evidence; sentence was not manifestly excessive. Therefore leave to adduce fresh evidence was refused and both conviction and sentence appeals were dismissed.
7 Dec 2020

SMITH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3211

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3211
Court

High Court

The Court found the offending overall to be of low gravity when mitigation (no prior convictions, voluntary anger management course, completion of community work, remorse and low risk of reoffending) was taken into account; the conviction had caused and risked substantial immigration and employment disadvantages which are out of all proportion to the low gravity of the offence; accordingly the conviction was quashed and the appellant discharged without conviction under s106.