New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Breach of extended supervision order

Legal area

Court

17 Nov 2022

R v ROBERTSON [2022] NZHC 3047

Citation

[2022] NZHC 3047
Court

High Court

A starting point of three years' imprisonment for the sexual offending under s134 was appropriate given the single-night but multi-incident nature and aggravating factors; discrete uplifts of four months for prior sexual convictions and six months for persistent breach of the extended supervision order produced an adjusted starting point of three years and ten months; a 20% discount for an early guilty plea and a 15% discount for s27 cultural/upbringing mitigation reduced the sentence to an end term of two years and six months' imprisonment, with automatic registration on the Child Sex Offend…
9 Dec 2021

BROWN v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2021] NZHC 3382

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3382
Court

High Court

The District Court did not err: the characterisation of the breaches as intentional and preparatory (grooming) was reasonably inferable from the agreed summaries and the offender's established history and probation assessments; the 13‑month sentence was within range and not manifestly excessive.
26 Aug 2021

PEARCE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2212

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2212
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court's sentencing was within principled range: a 10 month starting point for the indecent act and a 10 month uplift for the ESO breach were justified by the harm caused, proximity and vulnerability of the victim, and the offender's extensive prior breaches and ongoing risk; the 20 month global starting point reduced for a 20% guilty plea to 16 months did not breach totality and was not manifestly excessive, so the appeal was dismissed.
8 Jun 2018

JOLLY v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 1343

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1343
Court

High Court

The District Court sentence was quashed because the judge failed to allow a guilty plea discount; on rehearing the Court set a starting point of 18 months for possession of objectionable material reduced by 25% to 13 months, set a 14‑month starting point for the ESO breach reduced by 25% to 10 months (after uplift for prior breaches) and six months concurrent for the reporting breach, producing a total effective sentence of 23 months; the allegation of judicial bias was rejected under the Saxmere test as the errors identified did not demonstrate an inability to decide the case on its merits.

New Zealand Case Law

R v ROBERTSON [2022] NZHC 3047

BROWN v DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2021] NZHC 3382

PEARCE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2212

JOLLY v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 1343