21 Nov 2023
The Court held the District Court judge did not misapply Moses; however the judge erred in failing to provide a discrete remorse discount supported by the facts and report inconsistencies, and on resentencing the proper application of stage two adjustments produced a substituted sentence of 20 months' imprisonment.
29 Sept 2023
The District Court judge did not err: given the aggravating features including forced entry/home invasion, attack to the head, multiple attackers and serious injury, a starting point of 2 years 9 months was within the appropriate range under Nuku analogies for reckless wounding and a six month uplift for a clear pattern of violent offending (and offending while subject to release conditions) was justified; the final sentence of 27 months is not manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed.
29 Aug 2023
The defendant deliberately shot and killed the victim; the voluntary intoxication defence was rejected; the appropriate minimum period for the life sentence was the 10 year standard uplifted by two years to reflect the significant aggravating wounding of a second person, producing a 12 year minimum; life imprisonment imposed and a concurrent three year term for the wounding offence; fines and enforcement fees remitted.
8 Sept 2022
On the agreed summary the defendant's culpability for brief reckless conduct was at the lowest end of the spectrum given panic, traumatic background, absence of intent, full recovery of the child, intensive post‑incident assessment and strong mitigation; therefore a conviction would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending and the least restrictive appropriate outcome was a discharge without conviction under ss106–107 of the Sentencing Act 2002; permanent name suppression under CPA s200 was justified because publication would likely identify the children and the defendant's an…
21 Sept 2021
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).
8 Jul 2021
Starting point of eight years six months reduced by a total of 35% (15% guilty plea plus a 20% reduction for traumatic brain injury, cultural factors and vulnerability) because the offender's organic personality disorder materially reduced culpability and made deterrence less apt; resulting end sentence five years six months on attempted murder, with 12 months concurrent for wounding; no minimum non-parole period ordered under s 86; Parole Board to assess release and conditions.
23 Jul 2020
Although the offence attracted the mandatory maximum term under the three strikes regime, the Court found a clear and convincing case of manifest injustice based on the defendant's systemic childhood deprivation causally linked to offending, significant addiction and genuine rehabilitation potential (incl. willingness to undertake intensive long-term treatment), and therefore declined to order parole ineligibility; sentence of seven years imposed with parole eligibility retained.
7 May 2020
The Court held the District Court erred by adopting an excessive starting point. While the offending properly sat within Nuku band three, the appropriate global starting point was lower: three years with a nine month uplift for the representative offence (total 3 years 9 months). The District Court's numerical starting point was reduced accordingly; the Court accepted the District Court's aggregate discount of 45% but applied it to the corrected starting point, producing a substituted sentence of two years and one month imprisonment.
19 Jun 2019
Where this Court set aside a conviction because the evidence was insufficient to sustain it, the proper and orthodox exercise of its s 233 and inherent powers was to enter a judgment of acquittal rather than order a retrial; the Court therefore recalled its prior judgment and substituted an acquittal.
28 Sept 2018
The appropriate starting point for this sustained, non-spontaneous wounding involving a knife and a serious head laceration was fixed at two years and ten months' imprisonment; after discounts of six months for early guilty plea and four months combined for positive rehabilitation efforts and the adverse effect of incarceration on dependent children (and no discount for remorse), the appropriate sentence is two years' imprisonment for wounding with reckless disregard for safety.