New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sexual connection with young person

Legal area

Court

6 Apr 2023

STAINTON v R [2023] NZHC 787

Citation

[2023] NZHC 787
Court

High Court

The starting point of three years and six months was not manifestly excessive; however the appellant's youth/delayed emotional development and low risk of reoffending warranted an additional 10% deduction (in addition to earlier discounts), which reduced the notional sentence sufficiently to make home detention available; the Court allowed the appeal, quashed the sentence of imprisonment and substituted four months home detention, and ordered cancellation of automatic registration and declined discretionary registration.
29 Mar 2022

R v WHITE [2022] NZHC 607

Citation

[2022] NZHC 607
Court

High Court

The Court fixed a finite sentence of 31 months' imprisonment (two years seven months) to be served without parole under the second‑strike regime, applying a starting point of 2 years 9 months, a 7‑month uplift for prior similar offending, a small mitigation and a 25% guilty plea discount; the Court declined to impose preventive detention because the balance of risk, the availability and likelihood of an Extended Supervision Order and prospects for treatment did not justify an indeterminate sentence; the MPI that would have been imposed but for the strike regime was stated as 20 months.
9 Feb 2022

R v WYATT [2022] NZHC 133

Citation

[2022] NZHC 133
Court

High Court

Preventive detention was required because the defendant posed a high and enduring risk of serious sexual reoffending due to deep-seated causes, lack of insight, history of violent and sexual offending including prior offences against children, multiple breaches of an ESO and expert assessments indicating high likelihood of reoffending; a finite sentence, even with an ESO on release, would not provide adequate protection of the community, therefore the Court sentenced to preventive detention with a five year minimum term.
24 Sept 2019

HAWKEN v R [2019] NZCA 450

Citation

[2019] NZCA 450
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the sentence appeal because the District Court correctly identified and weighed significant aggravating features (17-year age gap, repeated penetrative intercourse, vulnerability and caregiver role breached, prior similar conviction, efforts to suppress evidence) and placed proper, not excessive, weight on inherent harm; the starting point and final sentence were within the range established by appellate authority (notably R v H and R v Johnson).
10 Apr 2019

WILLIAMS v R [2019] NZHC 768

Citation

[2019] NZHC 768
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court Judge's starting point and uplift were within range; a modest 10% discount for the appellant's adverse personal and cultural circumstances was warranted but even with that discount the 27‑month effective sentence was not manifestly excessive; the appeal was dismissed.
28 Jun 2016

R v TAMATEA [2016] NZHC 1412

Citation

[2016] NZHC 1412
Court

High Court

The court adopted the eight year starting point previously indicated by Simon France J as appropriate given frequent full sexual intercourse over 18 months, breach of trust, manipulation, targeting, significant age disparity and victim vulnerability; no discount was allowed for remorse because it was not genuine, but a 12‑month (slightly greater than 10%) reduction was allowed for the guilty plea, producing an effective sentence of seven years' imprisonment.

New Zealand Case Law

STAINTON v R [2023] NZHC 787

R v WHITE [2022] NZHC 607

R v WYATT [2022] NZHC 133

HAWKEN v R [2019] NZCA 450

WILLIAMS v R [2019] NZHC 768

R v TAMATEA [2016] NZHC 1412