New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Starting point in sentencing

Legal area

Court

15 Mar 2022

NZ POLICE v CRANCH [2022] NZHC 461

Citation

[2022] NZHC 461
Court

High Court

Although the District Court's starting point of 24 months was manifestly inadequate for the gravity of offender's possession of 22 firearms (19 MSSA) and large ammunition quantities, the appeal is dismissed because prosecutor acquiescence at sentence indication, the sentence being accepted on that indication, procedural history and delay, the respondent's compliance and near completion of home detention, absence of direct victims and risk of injustice from replacing a non-custodial sentence with imprisonment mean this Court should not substitute a custodial sentence on appeal.
1 May 2018

SMITH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 878

Citation

[2018] NZHC 878
Court

High Court

Judge Jagose found the six-year starting point was excessive because the combined-uplift used by the sentencing Judge moved the starting point materially beyond the band of comparable starting points for principal roles in LSD importation (identified at 3.5–5.5 years); applying appropriate uplifts and generous discounts (youth, autism spectrum disorder, rehabilitation, and 25% guilty plea credit) to a five-year starting point produced an end sentence of 22 months which the Court substituted and then lawfully commuted to 11 months home detention given the offender's youth and mitigating profil…
30 Jan 2018

KARA-NEWCOMBE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 25

Citation

[2018] NZHC 25
Court

High Court

The District Court's starting point of 12 months was beyond the appropriate range for the offending; having regard to comparable authorities a starting point of seven months was appropriate and the uplift for prior convictions and the discount for an early guilty plea each approximated 20% and therefore largely offset, so the appropriate substituted sentence is seven months' imprisonment.
6 Jul 2017

GEROS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 1544

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1544
Court

High Court

The High Court found no error or wholly unpersuasive reasoning in the District Court's selection of a two years six months starting point and a six month uplift given the unprovoked knife assault, theft of the vehicle, breach of home detention and prior convictions; therefore the three year sentence is upheld.
29 Jun 2017

L v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 1463

Citation

[2017] NZHC 1463
Court

High Court

Although the sentencing Judge did not expressly reference the statutory duty to impose the least restrictive outcome and rehabilitative needs, the Court concluded that home detention was within the available range and not manifestly excessive in the circumstances; however the combined order of home detention plus 160 hours community work was excessive in combination and the community work component was set aside while the home detention and post-detention conditions were affirmed.
19 May 2016

MARTIN v R [2016] NZCA 213

Citation

[2016] NZCA 213
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the sentencing judge's starting points and discounts were within the established range and properly differentiated individual culpability in light of aggravating features set out in R v Mako; therefore no interference was warranted and the appeals against sentence were dismissed, with an extension of time granted to Inamata to appeal.

New Zealand Case Law

NZ POLICE v CRANCH [2022] NZHC 461

SMITH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 878

KARA-NEWCOMBE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2018] NZHC 25

GEROS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 1544

L v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2017] NZHC 1463

MARTIN v R [2016] NZCA 213