New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Threatening to kill

Legal area

Court

13 Oct 2023

STUART v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 2867

Citation

[2023] NZHC 2867
Court

High Court

The Court held the 18 month starting point for the threatening to kill offence was excessive and adopted a 12 month starting point; added a 3 month uplift for the April family‑relationship assault and a 3 month uplift for relevant prior convictions; applied a 20% guilty plea discount which effectively cancelled the prior‑convictions uplift, resulting in an overall sentence of 15 months' imprisonment; home detention was not appropriate given lack of address and offender's history.
18 Jul 2023

THE KING v TIORI [2023] NZHC 1868

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1868
Court

High Court

Judge adopted a total starting point of eight years' imprisonment for the cumulative offending (six years for the grievous bodily harm band three offence plus concurrent shorter starting points for other offences), applied a 25% discount for the guilty plea, a 15% discount for personal background factors under the causative contribution approach (s 27 material), and a further 5% discount for addiction and rehabilitative prospects, resulting in a final sentence of four years and five months' imprisonment, with all component sentences to be served concurrently.
5 May 2023

R v WARWOOD [2023] NZHC 1065

Citation

[2023] NZHC 1065
Court

High Court

The Court applied the R v AM tariff, placed the 17 January 2021 lead sexual offending between the lower and middle of band three and set a 13‑year starting point for the lead assaults, added separate starting points for repeated strangulation and threats, adjusted for totality to 15 years for the 17 January events and to 17 years 6 months for all offending from March 2020–17 January 2021, then reduced that by 15% (guilty plea) and 10% (personal background credit for addiction) and added three months for offending on bail, producing a global concurrent sentence of 13 years 4 months with a mini…
1 Dec 2022

JOHN AITKEN v THE KING [2022] NZCA 593

Citation

[2022] NZCA 593
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the starting point of seven years was within the available range after proper adjustment for the statutory maximum given multiple significant aggravating factors including targeted head strikes, sustained unprovoked violence and vigilante motive; the global 35% discount for guilty plea, remorse, rehabilitation and restorative justice engagement was within the available range and the minor mathematical error reduced the sentence by 1.5 months; therefore there was no error warranting appellate intervention and the appeal was dismissed.
11 Oct 2022

R v BOWMAN [2022] NZHC 2622

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2622
Court

High Court

Preventive detention was declined. The Court concluded that although the offender demonstrated an escalating pattern of intimate partner violence and an elevated risk of future offending, factors including absence of prior lengthy imprisonment, equivocal expert assessments, remaining rehabilitative potential, and availability of post-release supervision options meant a lengthy finite sentence would adequately protect the community. The appropriate global finite sentence was 16 years' imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of 8 years, together with a protection order under s123B Se…
23 Sept 2022

R v KAITAI [2022] NZHC 2438

Citation

[2022] NZHC 2438
Court

High Court

Life imprisonment was mandatory and not displaced because the defendant made conscious and reckless decisions to arm herself and to use the weapon; the offending was reckless and disproportionate to provocation, involved an illegal sawn-off shotgun and caused significant harm; taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors and relevant comparative authorities (notably R v Paewhenua), the appropriate MPI was fixed at 10 years and 9 months (discounts applied for provocation, PTSD features, intoxication and remorse); subsidiary offending dealt with by concurrent one year sentence; firear…
6 May 2022

HAYNES v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2022] NZHC 950

Citation

[2022] NZHC 950
Court

High Court

The appeal is dismissed because the sentence of 13 months' imprisonment is within the available range and not manifestly excessive given the threats were premeditated, linked to prior serious domestic violence, committed in breach of release conditions, caused significant psychological harm, and the uplift for extensive prior offending was proportionate.
10 Feb 2022

R v UNDERSEN [2022] NZHC 141

Citation

[2022] NZHC 141
Court

High Court

Finite sentence of 13 years and 7 months imprisonment with an MPI of nine years imposed; preventive detention declined because offender retains realistic rehabilitative potential, significant finite sentence plus potential for extended supervision order and the offender's age on release provided adequate community protection.
13 Jul 2021

ZIMMERMAN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 1762

Citation

[2021] NZHC 1762
Court

High Court

Nuku guidelines were not directly applicable to s193 (assault with intent to injure) with a lower maximum; the District Court's cumulative effective starting point prior to guilty plea discount was too high when compared to comparable authorities (notably Goodman); after reassessing aggravating features and uplifts the appropriate aggregate sentence was reduced and the District Court sentence of two years six months was replaced with two years two months' imprisonment.
23 Apr 2021

ANDREWS v R [2021] NZCA 130

Citation

[2021] NZCA 130
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the sentence was not manifestly excessive: the individual starting points (including 15 months for attempting to pervert the course of justice and nine months for each protection order breach) were within available ranges, the 20% global discount for guilty pleas and remorse was appropriate, totality was properly applied, the erroneous release conditions were corrected but did not affect the lawfulness or length of the sentence, and procedural delays affecting parole consideration did not render the sentence excessive.