New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Totality principle in sentencing

Legal area

Court

26 Nov 2019

WILSON v R [2019] NZCA 584

Citation

[2019] NZCA 584
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held (1) no stay was warranted because despite delay and publicity a fair trial remained possible and no prosecutorial estoppel arose from the 2000 stay; (2) identification evidence concerning complainant C was sufficient to go to a jury given prior acquaintance and recognition; (3) permitting amendment to an alternative charge of attempt under s149 was lawful and not unfair; and (4) the sentence was not manifestly excessive because uplift for the additional convictions was justified on totality and no significant discount for delay was required absent prosecutorial/institutional de…
11 Oct 2018

BURTON v R [2018] NZCA 355

Citation

[2018] NZCA 355
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held there was no miscarriage of justice: the trial judge lawfully and reasonably inferred guilt from the cumulative circumstantial and cross-admissible evidence (including uncontested evidence from a resident that linked stolen property and a firearm to premises used by the appellant), the limited error about the scope of guilty pleas was harmless because independent evidence supported possession at Carr Street, allegations of operative trial counsel error were unproven, and the overall sentence with uplifts for multiple major burglaries, theft of a vehicle and firearm, serious pri…
31 Jul 2017

TITFORD V R [2017] NZCA 331

Citation

[2017] NZCA 331
Court

Court of Appeal

There was no miscarriage of justice: contemporaneous trial evidence and affidavits from trial judge and counsel showed no reasonable basis to refer the defendant for a fitness assessment under the statutory scheme; the fresh affidavits on appeal were not fresh, cogent or likely to change the result; severance was not warranted given cross‑admissibility and connectedness of offences; and the cumulative 24‑year sentence was not manifestly excessive after application of the totality principle. Publication of specified victim‑identifying material is prohibited as ordered.
14 Jul 2016

SILILOTO & ORS V R [2016] NZCA 328

Citation

[2016] NZCA 328
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the sentencing judge's assessments in most respects but allowed targeted adjustments: it refused to disturb Davoren's sentence; reduced Kaukasi's sentence by removing an inappropriate one-year uplift for s98A conduct and increasing bail-credit discount; reduced Sililoto's sentence to offset double punishment from recall by adjusting starting point and granting credit for time on recall; and dismissed Fetu's appeal on admissibility and conviction grounds because the judge correctly found a voluntary waiver and reliable identification and any error was not prejudicial.
15 Apr 2016

MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZCA 133

Citation

[2016] NZCA 133
Court

Court of Appeal

Under the Parole Act 2002 the definition of pre-sentence detention in s91 and the requirement in s90(2) mean that where an offender is subject to two or more concurrent sentences Corrections must calculate and deduct pre-sentence detention separately for each sentence; only where cumulative sentences form a notional single sentence does s90(3) permit a single deduction. Accordingly Corrections' per-sentence calculation was correct and the appellant was lawfully detained.
26 Oct 2007

COMMERCE COMMISSION V O'NEIL AND ANOR CA CA118/07

Citation

openlaw-689945d9_8962_4d5e_8224_209eae102509.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The District Court possessed jurisdiction under the Fair Trading Act together with its inherent powers to appoint an agent to administer refunds and to require the defendants to pay the agent's costs; the High Court was entitled to take the s43 refund order into account when reducing fines and its reductions were justified on the facts, so the appeal is allowed in part by restoring the District Court's s43 orders while leaving the reduced fines intact.

New Zealand Case Law

WILSON v R [2019] NZCA 584

BURTON v R [2018] NZCA 355

TITFORD V R [2017] NZCA 331

SILILOTO & ORS V R [2016] NZCA 328

MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZCA 133

COMMERCE COMMISSION V O'NEIL AND ANOR CA CA118/07