New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing bands

Legal area

Court

9 Oct 2023

E v R [2023] NZHC 2829

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2829
Court

High Court

The Court concluded the Judge's seven year starting point was within permissible range given three aggravating features (victim vulnerability, harm, breach of trust) and the applicable R v AM bands, but the aggregate mitigation was understated; an additional 8% discount for genuine remorse and substantial reparation was warranted, resulting in substitution of the original sentence with a reduced sentence of three years and seven months' imprisonment.
9 May 2023

FARSHAD ESFEHANI-BAHADORI v R [2023] NZCA 146

Citation

[2023] NZCA 146
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court applied Zhang and Berkland to assess role and quantity: Esfehani-Bahadori, though in a lesser role, had sufficient awareness, gang commitment and financial motivation to warrant placement at the bottom of band five and the sentence was not excessive; Safi's money laundering elevated his culpability but the District Court's separate uplift for subsequent offending produced an excessive combined starting point, requiring recalculation to a 12-year global starting point and reduction of the end sentence to reflect totality and parity.
27 Nov 2020

ANDREWS v R [2020] NZCA 599

Citation

[2020] NZCA 599
Court

Court of Appeal

Conviction appeal dismissed: the jury, having seen and heard the complainant's evidential interview, could reasonably be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt as to digital and penile penetration and there was no realistic risk of non-unanimity on the representative rape charge given the judge's directions and the evidence; Crown appeal on sentence allowed: the trial judge erred in placing offending in R v AM band 2 instead of band 3, the proper starting point was 12 years, and after a six‑month credit for good character the substituted sentence for charge 6 is 11 years 6 months to be served conc…
12 Jun 2020

ROSS v R [2020] NZHC 1322

Citation

[2020] NZHC 1322
Court

High Court

The High Court dismissed the appeal: the Judge correctly applied Zhang to set a lenient starting point, properly classified the appellant's role between lesser and significant, and adequately accounted for mitigation (addiction, EM bail, rehabilitation, guilty plea); the end sentence of two years and nine months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive and therefore is affirmed.
2 Jun 2020

PARKES v R [2020] NZCA 203

Citation

[2020] NZCA 203
Court

Court of Appeal

Quantum findings that defendant supplied at least 563.8 grams of methamphetamine were upheld; defendant played a leading wholesale role and, applying Zhang v R, the correct starting point for the drug offending is nine years' imprisonment; the MPI was inappropriate and is quashed; the one year cumulative sentence for attempting to dissuade witnesses remains; extension of time to file appeal granted.
30 Oct 2018

R v CASSIDY [2018] NZHC 2797

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2797
Court

High Court

Because the quantity attributable to the defendant was ambiguous and her role was peripheral and influenced by her partner, the judge placed the offending at the lower end of band one (starting point 2.5 years), applied a 10% reduction for prospects of rehabilitation and a 25% reduction for an early guilty plea producing an effective term of 1 year 8 months, and then determined that the least restrictive appropriate sentence was 10 months home detention given low reoffending risk, sole caregiver status and suitable approved residence.
29 Aug 2018

ARCHER v R [2018] NZCA 331

Citation

[2018] NZCA 331
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the original starting point was too high for the facts; on the evidence (including the psychiatric report) a modest stage‑one reduction of six months for mental health was justified because the appellant's borderline personality disorder and depression, combined with alcohol use as self‑medication, were judged likely contributing causes of the offending; after deducting remorse and a 25% guilty‑plea discount the substituted global sentence is six years' imprisonment.
22 Sept 2017

TAKAU v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 2300

Citation

[2017] NZHC 2300
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed because the sentence imposed was within the proper range under the R v Nuku framework, was not manifestly excessive or inappropriate, and the asserted ground that home detention was impracticable failed when it was established a suitable address was available, so no legal error required resentencing.
2 Aug 2017

R v BELL [2017] NZHC 1818

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1818
Court

High Court

A starting point of nine years was appropriate based on the quantities (placing offending at the lower end of band two in R v Fatu); a five percent reduction was applied for remorse and rehabilitation, and then a 20 percent reduction for the guilty plea (applied after other reductions), producing an end sentence of six years and ten months' imprisonment for methamphetamine importation; the two year sentence for GBL is concurrent, and possession of cannabis resulted in conviction and discharge; the sentence satisfies the least restrictive requirement.
7 Jun 2017

R v HARLAND [2017] NZHC 1226

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1226
Court

High Court

The court accepted the defendant's mitigating submissions and relevant authorities and set a starting point of nine years for possession of 1.1558 kg methamphetamine for supply; after applying a 20% guilty plea discount and a six month reduction for good character the appropriate sentence was six years and eight months imprisonment.