25 Jul 2023
An eight‑year starting point for manslaughter was appropriate given the aggravating features (weapon use, returning to fetch the knife, fatal injury); after reductions totalling approximately 37% for early plea (near 25%), remorse, lack of prior convictions and other personal factors, the appropriate sentence is five years' imprisonment.
14 Jun 2023
Leave to appeal dismissed because the offending was deliberate and grossly disproportionate to any provocation; the lower courts correctly applied s 102 to the offence and offender; there is no reasonable prospect of establishing that a life sentence was manifestly unjust and no appearance of a miscarriage of justice or question of public importance warranting further appeal.
14 Dec 2022
Notice of abandonment was set aside because the appellant's abandonment was linked to unsatisfactory conduct by the solicitor who handled the appeal steps; however, after considering the merits the Court dismissed the appeal because the appellant failed to establish a miscarriage of justice — trial counsel's tactical decisions (relying on a comprehensive police video interview and concerns about calling the appellant) were reasonable, there was no demonstrable prejudice from not calling the brother and his later affidavit was neither sufficiently credible nor cogent as fresh evidence, and the…
5 Dec 2022
The Court held the appellant's personal circumstances and reactionary nature of the offending did not displace the statutory presumption in favour of life imprisonment; the conduct (deliberate acceleration, continued acceleration despite awareness, driving away without assistance) established culpability warranting life imprisonment and an MPI of 11 years which was within the appropriate range and not manifestly excessive.
10 Oct 2022
The High Court held the District Court judge's starting point and aggregate discounts (total 55%) were within range and properly applied given the offending, the provocation/cultural linkage, guilty plea and genuine remorse and rehabilitative prospects; the sentence of 27 months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and the appeal was dismissed.
4 Oct 2022
Starting point fixed at 8.5 years' imprisonment for manslaughter (Band Three, lower edge) after comparing analogous cases; reduced by six months for provocation to 8 years, then discounted 25% for early and consistent guilty plea and a further 5% for remorse resulting in an end sentence of 6 years' imprisonment; unlawful possession of a firearm sentenced to 6 months to be served concurrently; order for destruction of firearm and ammunition.
28 Sept 2022
Defendant was sentenced for manslaughter on the basis he participated in an unlawful common purpose and did not sufficiently withdraw; applying Taueki the offending sits at the higher end of Band 2 and a starting point of six years nine months was appropriate, reduced by recognised mitigators (including 25% guilty plea and further allowances for restorative justice and custody hardship totalling 40%) yielding an end sentence for manslaughter of four years which, after application of the totality principle with existing sentences, resulted in a cumulative manslaughter sentence of three years a…
3 Aug 2022
The High Court allowed the appeal because the District Court misapplied s 57(3) by treating the premises as the dog's private space, improperly characterising the complainant's attempt to pat the dog as provocation, drawing speculative inferences about the dog's psychology and relying on post-incident behaviour; none rendered the circumstances 'exceptional' and therefore an order for destruction of Zeus was required under s 57(3).
1 Jun 2022
Life imprisonment was appropriate and not manifestly unjust given the deliberate act of turning and accelerating the vehicle to strike a vulnerable person and fleeing the scene; mitigation from grief, PTSD and substance use was insufficient to displace the presumption of life imprisonment, but warranted a modest reduction to the minimum non-parole period, set at 11 years.
20 May 2022
The s104 factors of unlawful entry and extreme brutality were established, the defendant's culpability was at the high end of the standard range, provocatory circumstances and prior good character did not materially reduce culpability, and therefore life imprisonment with an MPI of 18 years and 6 months is the appropriate sentence; a concurrent three‑month term for the related family assault is imposed.