New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentence uplift

Legal area

Court

2 May 2023

MOFFATT v R [2023] NZHC 1023

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1023
Court

High Court

The Court held the 12‑month uplift for possession of a cut‑down firearm and 40 rounds of ammunition was within the available range given the context of drug dealing and the risk of lethal harm; the 10% uplift for prior offending was modest; the appellant's post‑charge rehabilitative efforts warranted an additional discrete two‑month (approx. 10%) discount, producing a substituted sentence of 20 months' imprisonment; home detention was inappropriate due to the seriousness of firearms offending and public protection concerns.
24 Nov 2022

DARRELL EDWARD JAMES DUNN v THE KING [2022] NZCA 574

Citation

[2022] NZCA 574
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to withdraw the abandonment is declined because the decision to abandon was deliberate and informed and the proposed challenge to the nine‑month uplift is not arguable: the Parole Board had jurisdiction to impose the special release condition and there is no clear or material error of fact or law in the sentence.
3 May 2022

RAWLINGS v R [2022] NZHC 914

Citation

[2022] NZHC 914
Court

High Court

The end sentence of 22 months on the lead charge expressly incorporated a two‑month uplift to represent cancelled fines; accordingly the District Court's remission of fines stands and the separate three months' imprisonment imposed to represent remitted fines is quashed.
20 Dec 2021

PRICE v POLICE [2021] NZHC 3265

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3265
Court

High Court

The trial Judge's discrete uplifts produced a cumulative starting point of 51 months which was manifestly excessive under the totality principle; substituting a 45-month starting point and applying discounts (guilty plea 25%, personal/cultural 15%, youth 10%) produced an appropriate end sentence of 23 months imprisonment; the appeal is allowed, the District Court sentence is quashed and replaced with 23 months with leave to apply for home detention if a suitable residence is found.
5 Mar 2019

EPERE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2019] NZHC 336

Citation

[2019] NZHC 336
Court

High Court

The High Court held the Judge did not err: uplifts for driving whilst disqualified and for multiple unlawful entries were justified because they were distinct incidents/offences; the final sentence of 18 months imprisonment was within the available range and not manifestly excessive; and refusal of home detention was a proper exercise of discretion given breach history and risk of non‑compliance.
12 Dec 2018

SECKER-ALISON v POLICE [2018] NZHC 3277

Citation

[2018] NZHC 3277
Court

High Court

The uplift for prior convictions was justified by the appellant's extensive 33-conviction history showing a propensity for violence and the 2018 offences were discrete from 2017 offending; a five-month starting point for the commercial burglary was available, the combined starting points plus a two-month uplift mitigated by 25% for an early plea produced a lawful sentence of approximately seven and a half months' imprisonment which was not manifestly excessive, and disparity with the co-defendant's lenient sentence did not render this sentence unjustifiable.
12 Nov 2018

SAMUELS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 2931

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2931
Court

High Court

Appeal allowed in part because the Judge erred by adopting too high a starting point and by applying an excessive three month uplift for conviction history; correct approach yields a 12 month total term reached by a 10 month starting point, a 3 month uplift for the balance of offending, a 1 month uplift for conviction history, and a 15% (three month) guilty plea discount, with the term to be served concurrently and apportioned as previously indicated.
17 Oct 2018

RENATA v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 2673

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2673
Court

High Court

The Court held the uplifts applied by the District Court for the theft and for previous dishonesty convictions were within the available range and not manifestly excessive, but the sentencing Judge erred by failing to give any tangible credit for the appellant's demonstrated remorse and for his genuine but uncorroborated assistance to police. The Court therefore reduced the end sentence by applying a one month discount for remorse and a four month discount for assistance, resulting in a reduced burglary sentence of two years one month and a concurrent theft sentence of five months.
2 Jul 2018

SHEPHERD v R [2018] NZCA 232

Citation

[2018] NZCA 232
Court

Court of Appeal

The two‑month uplift for prior convictions was excessive given their lack of seriousness and dissimilarity to the offending; the appropriate prison sentence was eight months and, applying the conventional conversion to home detention and accounting for time already served, the commuted sentence should be one month's home detention; extension of time to file the appeal was granted.
21 Mar 2018

DANIELS v R [2018] NZCA 62

Citation

[2018] NZCA 62
Court

Court of Appeal

The new alibi evidence was not admitted because it was not fresh and lacked sufficient probative cogency to create a real risk of miscarriage of justice (it was consistent with the complainant's evidence that the appellant spent the day with his daughter and therefore did not materially undermine the convictions). On sentencing, a four-year starting point for supply of approximately 13 grams of methamphetamine and a cumulative uplift of 22 months for serious violence (strangulation), multiple threats and prior offending were held to be within the available range and not manifestly excessive;…