New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing act 2002

Legal area

Court

6 Oct 2023

MCNOE v R [2023] NZHC 2801

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2801
Court

High Court

Where the statutory test in s 80I(1) is satisfied, the court must grant leave to apply for conversion to home detention under s 80I(2) and may not attach conditions to that grant that are inconsistent with the statutory scheme; the District Court's imposition of conditions requiring a residential rehabilitation address and six months imprisonment before application was ultra vires and must be quashed, while the grant of leave itself stands.
16 Mar 2020

BURTON v R [2020] NZHC 522

Citation

[2020] NZHC 522
Court

High Court

A forfeiture order is valid as to computer storage devices that contain objectionable publications even if they also contain lawful material; however property not used as an instrument of offending cannot be forfeited and police must identify and preserve such material prior to seeking forfeiture; on the facts three devices properly forfeited and clean media are to be returned, so the appeal is dismissed.
7 Sept 2018

DIANNA MARJI THEODORE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 2364

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2364
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed; sentencing judge's starting point and uplift for the assault were not erroneous and totality was considered, but a more generous reduction for remorse and personal circumstances (dependent children) was warranted given the sentence was on the cusp of the home detention threshold; original sentence of 25 months and two weeks quashed and substituted with 23 months imprisonment with a concurrent three months on the assault, and leave granted to apply under s80I for possible home detention.
23 Apr 2018

O’SHAUGHNESSY v R [2018] NZCA 117

Citation

[2018] NZCA 117
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed; the Court held that an honest but unreasonable belief in consent caused by voluntary intoxication does not mitigate under the Sentencing Act, premeditation can coexist with a mistaken belief in consent where the defendant knew of the complainant's impairment, and the three year starting point and refusal of a youth discount were appropriate under the AM bands.
27 Mar 2017

BEAZLEY v THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2017] NZHC 568

Citation

[2017] NZHC 568
Court

High Court

The court varied the 12‑month home detention order to a nine‑month term under s 80F(d) of the Sentencing Act 2002 because the applicant had shown clear positive rehabilitation, had supportive evidence from Corrections and Police, and participation in university study made reduction and variation in the public and individual interest.
17 Mar 2017

BROADHURST v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 498

Citation

[2017] NZHC 498
Court

High Court

When a home detention sentence is cancelled prior to the period of custody, the subsequent custody is properly characterised as pre-sentence detention under the Parole Act; consequently the sentencing judge was entitled to decline to treat that period as time served when fixing the new term, but the period between cancellation (26 October 2016) and sentencing (19 December 2016) must be credited by the Department of Corrections for parole eligibility.
7 Mar 2017

BENCH v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2017] NZHC 355

Citation

[2017] NZHC 355
Court

High Court

The High Court concluded there was no error of law: the District Court judge properly exercised sentencing discretion, validly considered reparation (including its insufficiency and improbability of further payment) and gave adequate reasons under s 31. The judge was entitled to decline home detention where meaningful reparation could not be shown and the offending gravity required imprisonment.
20 Dec 2016

MARTYN JACKSON V R [2016] NZCA 627

Citation

(2015) 28CRNZ 144
Court

Court of Appeal

An appeal against a refusal to discharge without conviction is properly characterised as an appeal against conviction and sentence, with the primary challenge being to the conviction; under the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 the original election to a jury trial controls which court is the first appeal court, so where the appellant elected a jury trial the Court of Appeal is the first appeal court even if the election was later withdrawn.
1 Nov 2016

COWIE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2016] NZHC 2608

Citation

[2016] NZHC 2608
Court

High Court

No error was shown in the sentencing Judge's approach or outcome; the Judge was entitled to impose a three month term given the offender's serious and repeated alcohol-related offending and poor compliance with community sentences, so the appeal is dismissed under s250 since no different sentence is warranted.
7 Apr 2016

THOMASON v NZ POLICE [2016] NZHC 596

Citation

[2016] NZHC 596
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court Judge properly exercised sentencing discretion, identified and weighed relevant factors and did not act on an incorrect principle; the refusal to impose home detention was within permissible discretionary bounds given the seriousness of the assault, extensive domestic violence history, denials, prior breaches and rehabilitation concerns, and therefore the appeal was dismissed as not plainly wrong.