New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abduction

Legal area

Court

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.
27 Jun 2019

TROON v R [2019] NZCA 265

Citation

[2019] NZCA 265
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the appeals against sentence. The judge was correct to decline a formal sentence indication during the part‑heard trial under s 61; amendment of charges and acceptance of guilty pleas after complainant evidence did not produce a miscarriage of justice where public interest and complainant welfare were considered; although the Court considered the starting point adopted for Mr Thompson was lower than might have been appropriate on the facts, the resulting sentences were not manifestly excessive in all the circumstances and did not warrant interference.
22 Mar 2019

R v KING [2019] NZHC 537

Citation

[2019] NZHC 537
Court

High Court

Court fixed a 10 year starting point for the sexual violation charge, applied a one year uplift (six months for prior convictions and six months for offending while subject to release conditions) producing a provisional 11 year term, applied a 25% guilty plea discount to reach a finite sentence of 8 years 3 months to be served concurrently on all counts, imposed a minimum period of imprisonment of two thirds (5 years 6 months), and declined to order preventive detention because the risk of reoffending was linked primarily to untreated substance abuse and not an entrenched pattern of serious s…
12 Jun 2018

R v ADAMS [2018] NZHC 1386

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1386
Court

High Court

Adopted a determinate sentence of six years five months imprisonment with a minimum term of 60%, and declined preventive detention because, despite a high risk profile, there was no established pattern of prior sexual offending, the offender had not yet undergone targeted sexual-offending treatment, and a lengthy determinate sentence combined with prospective extended supervision provided adequate community protection.
18 May 2018

R v Mitchell [2018] NZHC 1112

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1112
Court

High Court

Preventive detention was imposed because the offender demonstrated a long-standing pattern of serious, predatory sexual and violent offending against vulnerable strangers, high actuarial risk of reoffending endorsed by forensic assessors, persistent denial preventing rehabilitation, and because a finite sentence (with extended supervision) would not adequately protect the community; minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years for preventive detention was necessary, with charge 4 (1992 abduction) sentenced to five years concurrent custody.
24 Feb 2017

GALVIN v R [2016] NZCA 22

Citation

GALVIN v R [2016] NZCA 22
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the offending fell within the higher end of rape band two and that an 11‑year starting point was available and appropriate given multiple and serious aggravating factors; the 20% guilty plea reduction to an effective sentence of eight years and ten months was proper; psychiatric evidence did not establish a causal role of active psychosis at the time of the offence nor that imprisonment was rendered less appropriate by mental disorder, so no reduction for mental health was warranted.
29 Jun 2016

LYON v R [2016] NZCA 293

Citation

[2016] NZCA 293
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court found trial counsel obtained adequate instructions and conducted the defence in accordance with those instructions; there was no error amounting to a miscarriage of justice and the convictions were safe; the aggregate sentence of 15 years with an eight year minimum period was justified by the gravity and multiplicity of the offending and not manifestly excessive.
6 May 2016

DARADKEH V R [2016] NZCA 172

Citation

[2016] NZCA 172
Court

Court of Appeal

Conviction appeal dismissed: absence of an interpreter did not make the second interview unfair because appellant had sufficient English, had legal advice present, knowingly gave detailed admissions consistent with DNA evidence and the transcript; no s 122 warning required; Sentence appeal allowed: starting point of nine years was excessive for the culpability shown, appropriate starting point seven years, total deduction six months producing an end sentence of six years six months; minimum non‑parole term quashed and none imposed.
13 Aug 2010

SKELTON V R SC 32/2010

Citation

SC 32/2010
Court

Supreme Court

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the proposed appeal did not have any prospect of succeeding; the Court applied the same reasons given in Headley and refused leave.
9 Jun 2010

HEADLEY V R SC 31/2010

Citation

SC 31/2010
Court

Supreme Court

Leave to appeal dismissed because there was no evidence the venue refusal was improper, the Court of Appeal's assessment was sound, the proposed appeal lacked prospect of success, and no miscarriage of justice was shown given absence of any realistic defence.