New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Youth and culpability

Legal area

Court

14 Dec 2023

R v BURNS-WONG-TUNG [2023] NZHC 350

Citation

[2023] NZHC 350
Court

High Court

The court found the offending engaged s 104(1)(e) (and would have engaged s 104(1)(g)) due to premeditated vigilantism, frenzied and prolonged knife attack on a captive and subsequent callous conduct, but concluded that imposing the statutory 17-year MPI would be manifestly unjust in the circumstances of this offender given her youth, causative background, prospects of rehabilitation and personal mitigation; accordingly imposed life imprisonment with an MPI of 15 years.
25 Jul 2023

M (CA434/2022) v R [2023] NZCA 319

Citation

[2023] NZCA 319
Court

Court of Appeal

Conviction appeal dismissed: trial judge's directions on self-defence were fair, accurate and not misleading; no miscarriage of justice. Sentence appeal allowed: life sentence for a 14-year-old was manifestly unjust in the circumstances under the Dickey framework; appropriate disposal is a determinate sentence of 13 years' imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment of five years and two months. Suppression order for O under s202(2)(a) confirmed.
20 Feb 2019

T (CA370/2018) v R [2019] NZCA 13

Citation

[2019] NZCA 13
Court

Court of Appeal

Convictions were upheld because the jury could reasonably accept core elements of the complainant's evidence and there were plausible evidential explanations for mixed verdicts; the sentence was quashed because the sentencing judge mischaracterised the 111 call (threat) and overstated breach of trust, and failed adequately to account for appellant's youth and substantial whānau support under s27 and s7, warranting reduction and substitution of sentences and leave to apply for home detention; suppression for appellant under s200 was necessary to protect the complainant.
26 Feb 2018

CURTIS v COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA [2018] NZCA 22

Citation

[2018] NZCA 22
Court

Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal was granted because the Court identified arguable errors of law in the High Court judge's application of s 8(1)(c): specifically potential misapplication of the relevance of alleged complicity in delay absent required nexus and failure to assess the totality of circumstances relevant to whether surrender would be unjust or oppressive.

New Zealand Case Law

R v BURNS-WONG-TUNG [2023] NZHC 350

M (CA434/2022) v R [2023] NZCA 319

T (CA370/2018) v R [2019] NZCA 13

CURTIS v COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA [2018] NZCA 22