23 Nov 2020
The starting point of 24 months' imprisonment was within the available range given the aggravating features and prior similar conviction, and the Judge did not err in principle by imposing six months' home detention rather than community detention; the appeal is dismissed.
12 Dec 2019
The two year uplift to the global starting point was appropriate given the seriousness, multiplicity and specific aggravating features (strangulation, use of weapon, threats to kill, serious injury, vulnerability) analogous to Latu; there was no basis for any discrete discount for previous good character or remorse because of prior offending, incomplete treatment, minimisation, victim blaming and lack of genuine remorse; therefore the appeal was dismissed and the sentence (three years and eleven months imprisonment) was upheld.
4 Nov 2019
Appeal allowed because the appropriate assessment applying Zhang reduced the proper starting point for this low‑level, multiple transaction supply (0.7g) aggravated by offending during home detention to 15 months, and after a 20% discount for guilty pleas the correct concurrent sentence is 12 months imprisonment; accordingly the original 22‑month sentence was quashed and substituted.
1 Feb 2019
The application to adjourn was declined; the trial and sentencing law in force at the time of sentencing must be applied by the sentencing court, and any change by the Court of Appeal does not automatically operate retrospectively; the proper course is to decide this appeal promptly and allow the appellant the right to appeal to the Court of Appeal and to apply to join the scheduled April hearing if appropriate.
27 Apr 2018
Extension of time was granted but leave to appeal was declined because there was insufficient empirical evidence of systemic sentence drift to justify revisiting the Taueki guideline decision; guideline bands remain persuasive guidance applied flexibly in sentencing and consistency does not displace sentencing discretion; no miscarriage of justice shown.