New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Prior convictions

Legal area

Court

14 Dec 2023

MATEKUARE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 3706

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3706
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed; lead charge starting point of six months imprisonment was appropriate, but aggregate uplift applied by the District Court exceeded what totality permitted. Applying a two month uplift for the supermarket trespass and breach of community work, then a 25% guilty plea discount, and declining s27 mitigation, the effective sentence was reduced to 14 months imprisonment; specific sentence adjustments were ordered to reflect proper concurrency and cumulative sequencing.
3 Jul 2023

GRAY v POLICE [2023] NZHC 1699

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1699
Court

High Court

The Judge's 12-month starting point for two aggravated assaults and four-month uplift for the appellant's significant relevant prior convictions were within the proper sentencing range given the multiple violent assaults, the need to protect retailers and deter repeat offending; the appellant's substance abuse and prior failures to engage with supervision did not mitigate the sentence sufficiently to justify non-custodial alternatives; no error was shown and the appeal is dismissed.
24 Apr 2023

R v GOUNDAR [2023] NZHC 923

Citation

[2023] NZHC 923
Court

High Court

Starting point for the representative assault was set at 2.5 months' imprisonment, uplifted by two weeks for similar prior offending, resulting in a total sentence of three months' imprisonment to be served cumulatively on the existing sentence because of the victim's vulnerability and abuse of trust and absence of mitigating factors.
25 May 2022

UNSWORTH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2022] NZHC 1159

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1159
Court

High Court

Given the appellant's recent history of breaches including a contemporaneous break-in of the protected person's home and prior imprisonment for a prior breach, the 12 month starting point was not excessive; however the guilty plea discount should have been the full amount for an early plea, and taking that together with the knife uplift being toward the top of the range, the appropriate sentence for the breach is reduced from 12 months to 10 months' imprisonment, with concurrent sentences and release conditions left unchanged.
10 Nov 2021

R v DRONSFIELD [2021] NZHC 3042

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3042
Court

High Court

Because the offender lacked means to pay a fine, required significant rehabilitative intervention, and had already experienced punitive effects from remand and EM bail, the appropriate sentence was 15 months' intensive supervision with strict rehabilitative conditions rather than a fine or community detention.
12 Aug 2021

DARRYN MICHAEL HORTON v R [2021] NZSC 99

Citation

[2021] NZSC 99
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal correctly held that the complainant's prior minor and historic dishonesty convictions were not substantially helpful under s37 to assess veracity in context, and any potential cumulative effect would not have avoided a miscarriage given the risk of reciprocal exposure of the applicant's dishonesty history.
29 Jan 2021

R v ROSS [2021] NZHC 37

Citation

[2021] NZHC 37
Court

High Court

The judge set a starting point of four years imprisonment for kidnapping combined with threats to the primary complainant, added a combined uplift of 15 months for the initial assault and the threat to the teenage witness (reduced for totality), applied further uplifts totalling 12 months for prior convictions and offending while on bail, then applied cumulative discounts totalling 35% (22 months) for background, remorse and a guilty plea, resulting in a final concurrent sentence of four years and five months' imprisonment; a minimum period of imprisonment was declined.
10 Dec 2020

WM (SC 74/2020) v R [2020] NZSC 139

Citation

[2020] NZSC 139
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the decision that trial counsel's advice to admit prior convictions was within the range of competent conduct was a fact‑specific assessment and not a matter of general or public importance, and the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient prospects of a miscarriage of justice.
11 Aug 2020

WM (CA714/2018) v R [2020] NZCA 338

Citation

[2020] NZCA 338
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because the defence's decision, made after extensive consultation, to admit the prior convictions was a competent tactical choice available to experienced counsel; the admission did not create a miscarriage of justice, the Crown did not effectively convert the material into inadmissible propensity evidence, and the trial Judge's directions and exercise of s9 discretion did not render the trial unfair.
19 Sept 2019

MOHI v R [2019] NZCA 441

Citation

[2019] NZCA 441
Court

Court of Appeal

Although the Crown conceded delayed disclosure of additional fingerprint lifts, the late material was not shown to be materially prejudicial: the defence had already advanced and explored the plausible alternative explanations at trial, the additional lifts did not implicate the appellant and did not alter the central issue of whether he was involved; therefore no real risk of miscarriage of justice existed and conviction stands. On sentence, the trial judge's starting point was consistent with appellate guidance for dwelling burglaries and the uplift for prior convictions, while arguably ste…