New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Three strikes legislation

Legal area

Court

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.
23 Nov 2020

HOLMES-LIBBIS v R [2020] NZHC 3100

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3100
Court

High Court

Even if the Judge did not apply the guilty plea discount in the precise sequence mandated by Moses v R, the aggregate discounts for mitigating factors were sufficiently large that the end sentence of three years four months imprisonment was within the available range and not manifestly excessive; accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
18 May 2020

LIAI v R [2020] NZCA 167

Citation

[2020] NZCA 167
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court found no error in the sentencing Judge's exercise of discretion: the nine and a half year starting point was within range given the aggravating features, any notional uplift for abduction did not produce a material error because the Judge adjusted for totality and reduced the combined starting point to eight years before mitigation, and the belated apology lacked weight as remorse. The end sentence of seven years two months to be served cumulatively was appropriate and is upheld.
19 Jul 2019

PURUA-KING v R [2019] NZHC 1698

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1698
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed. The sentencing judge did not err in assessing and quantifying discounts for youth, insight and cultural background given the appellant's relatively stable early whāngai upbringing and the need for a causal link between systemic deprivation and offending under Heta and Arona; the operation of the three strikes regime produced an intended parole ineligibility that does not amount to manifest injustice in the circumstances; remittal of modest fines and the minor uplift of one month was not sufficient to warrant appellate adjustment.
15 Sept 2017

R v HEIHEI [2017] NZHC 2243

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2243
Court

High Court

Although the statutory regime requires life imprisonment without parole for a Stage 2 murder, the court found that, given the spontaneous fraternal fight, absence of common aggravating factors, partial support for defendant's self-defence account, his guilty plea, age, alcohol-related issues, and victim/family circumstances, imposing life without parole would be manifestly unjust; accordingly the court imposed life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of ten years under s103.

New Zealand Case Law

R v WHITE [2022] NZHC 607

HOLMES-LIBBIS v R [2020] NZHC 3100

LIAI v R [2020] NZCA 167

PURUA-KING v R [2019] NZHC 1698

R v HEIHEI [2017] NZHC 2243