New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Youth sentencing

Legal area

Court

2 Aug 2023

R v HANARA [2023] NZHC 2057

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2057
Court

High Court

Offending constituted a medium-to-upper band two Taueki manslaughter (concerted street attack with knife and retreating victim); appropriate starting point was fixed at 7.5 years' imprisonment; discrete mitigating discounts applied were 25% for early guilty plea, 15% for youth, 20% for neurodisability/personal circumstances and 5% for remorse yielding an end sentence of two years and 7.5 months; time served credit (5 years) produced immediate release with standard six-month release conditions and any special conditions imposed by probation officer.
12 Jul 2023

FROST v R [2023] NZCA 294

Citation

[2023] NZCA 294
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the High Court's 23-year starting point as not erroneous, rejected adoption of the Modified Discount Methodology, awarded a two-year reduction for early guilty pleas and a separate three-year reduction for personal mitigation (youth, mental health history, lack of prior convictions), resulting in substitution of the MPI from 20 years to 18 years.
27 Mar 2023

R v H [2023] NZHC 626

Citation

[2023] NZHC 626
Court

High Court

Although the offending was serious and involved discharge of a firearm causing injury, the court concluded that the direct and indirect consequences of a conviction (jeopardy to the defendant's newly established life, employment and sporting prospects in Australia), when weighed with his youth, remorse, lack of prior convictions and substantial cooperation, would be out of all proportion to the gravity of the offending; accordingly the defendant was discharged without conviction (the notional sentence if convicted would have been one year imprisonment).
27 Jan 2023

DICKEY v R [2023] NZCA 2

Citation

[2023] 2 NZLR 405
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that for each appellant the sentence of life imprisonment with a mandatory MPI of 10 years was manifestly unjust on the facts. Manifest injustice was found by assessing overall culpability and personal mitigating factors (youth, neurodevelopmental immaturity, cognitive and mental health impairments, traumatic and deprived upbringing, guilty pleas and assistance), and by recognising the disproportionate impact of an indeterminate life sentence coupled with a 10-year MPI and lifetime parole on young offenders. The Court quashed the life sentences and substituted determinate sente…
3 May 2017

POMARE v R [2017] NZCA 155

Citation

[2017] NZCA 155
Court

Court of Appeal

Although a larger combined discount for youth and FASD may have been open to the sentencing Judge, the trial Judge lawfully exercised discretion having regard to objective seriousness, the aggravating features under s 104, and the available discounts; the resulting life sentence with a 12-year MPI is not manifestly excessive and the appeal is dismissed.
17 Jun 2011

ATARIA V R SC 31/2011

Citation

SC 31/2011
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal was dismissed because the six year sentence was not manifestly excessive; the sentencing judge properly gave little weight to the youth's much lower sentence given the substantial difference in age and the fact the youth had pleaded guilty, which justified the disparity.

New Zealand Case Law

R v HANARA [2023] NZHC 2057

FROST v R [2023] NZCA 294

R v H [2023] NZHC 626

DICKEY v R [2023] NZCA 2

POMARE v R [2017] NZCA 155

ATARIA V R SC 31/2011