New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Aggravated robbery

Legal area

Court

30 Nov 2023

DUDLEY TROUGH v R [2023] NZHC 3459

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3459
Court

High Court

The High Court held the sentence was not manifestly excessive: the District Court's starting point of three years nine months for the aggravated robbery was within range given group entry, actual violence and gang context; uplifts for the vehicle taking, firearms, drugs and related counts were justified and not excessive; consideration of totality at the end of the sentencing process was not an error in the circumstances; the aggregate sentence of 39 months' imprisonment was appropriate and upheld.
16 Nov 2023

HUNTLEY v R [2023] NZHC 3236

Citation

[2023] NZHC 3236
Court

High Court

The High Court concluded the District Court judge properly considered Mr Huntley's methamphetamine addiction and personal background, the 15% discount for personal circumstances (with further allowances for rehabilitation and youth) was within the permissible range, the effective EM-bail credit (approximately 18 days) was not plainly inadequate given breaches, and the overall sentence of two years and three months imprisonment was not manifestly excessive; appeal dismissed.
2 Nov 2023

FUSITUA v R [2023] NZCA 544

Citation

[2023] NZCA 544
Court

Court of Appeal

Conviction quashed because the acquittal of a co-offender combined with material weaknesses and inconsistencies in the identification evidence (notably the unexplained absence of distinctive tattoos, discrepancies in eyewitness descriptions, and reliance on circumstantial CCTV timing) created a real risk of miscarriage of justice; discretion exercised to refuse a retrial in accordance with appellate authority.
25 Oct 2023

SULUSI v R [2023] NZCA 513

Citation

[2023] NZCA 513
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the mandatory no‑parole order under s 86C(4)(a) produced a 200% increase in minimum custody relative to ordinary sentencing and, given the offender's significant personal disadvantage and the specific facts of the offending, resulted in treatment disproportionately severe in breach of s 9 NZBORA; therefore the s 86C(4)(a) order was set aside while the custodial term of five years and three months was affirmed.
19 Oct 2023

HIRAKA v R [2023] NZHC 2898

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2898
Court

High Court

A six month uplift for the unlawful possession of the shotgun was appropriate given the separate finding of possession with ammunition and public risk; however the sentencing Judge failed to account for 13.5 months spent on final recall which produced a form of double punishment and required an overall reduction of six months to avoid double punishment; the end sentence was therefore reduced from 32 months to 26 months imprisonment.
28 Sept 2023

TE KAAWA v R [2023] NZHC 2708

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2708
Court

High Court

The High Court held the starting point of five years six months imprisonment (five years six months before mitigation) was within the available range for the aggravated robbery given the aggravating features, but the specific four-month uplift for the stolen vehicle was unnecessary as that factor was already reflected in the starting point; the EM bail credit of just under 40% was within range given breaches; accordingly the appeal was allowed in part and the sentence reduced from two years four months to two years two months imprisonment on the aggravated robbery charge.
5 Sept 2023

GEMMELL v R [2023] NZCA 420

Citation

[2023] NZCA 420
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court allowed the appeal, reduced the starting point and overall sentence and set aside the non-parole order because (a) the appellant's role was materially less than his co-offender warranting a lower starting point; (b) a discount for extended restrictive EM bail was warranted despite limited late breaches; and (c) applying the three strikes non-parole order to the appellant while his co-offender, who played the lead role, remained eligible for parole post-repeal produced a disproportionate result breaching s9 NZBORA; accordingly sentence of 4 years 2 months was quashed and replaced wit…
1 Sept 2023

R v NGARONGO [2023] NZHC 2442

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2442
Court

High Court

A seven year starting point was appropriate for a daylight home invasion involving multiple offenders, detention and actual violence; relevant personal mitigation (abusive background, methamphetamine addiction and cultural factors) warranted a 20% global reduction for each, a modest guilty plea discount for Ngarongo and a nine month EM bail credit for Ngarongo, while only a limited uplift for prior convictions was applied to Ngarongo (six months) and none to Watson, producing final sentences of five years for Ngarongo and five years seven months for Watson.
10 Aug 2023

URUAMO v R [2023] NZCA 356

Citation

[2023] NZCA 356
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the sentencing Judge did not err: the starting point and totality adjustments were within range, the Judge correctly applied a 15% reduction for personal mitigating factors and was entitled to decline a separate youth discount or additional credit for early rehabilitative steps; the overall sentence of five years and five months was not manifestly excessive and the appeal was dismissed.
1 Aug 2023

THOMAS v R [2023] NZHC 2027

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2027
Court

High Court

Starting point for this aggravated robbery reduced to four years. Applied 25% discount for guilty plea, 15% discount for youth and 15% discount for cultural/background factors (causative contribution established) resulting in an end sentence of 22 months' imprisonment. Appeal allowed: original sentence substituted with 22 months imprisonment and leave granted under s80I to apply later for substitution to home detention if a suitable address is found; Firearms Prohibition Order and reparation order from District Court remain.