Aorangi v Police - [2025] NZHC 786

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2025-409-74

[2025] NZHC 786

BETWEEN
DANTE AORANGI

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 3 April 2025

Appearances:

C G Nolan for Appellant G J Barrett for Respondent

Judgment:

4 April 2025

JUDGMENT OF EATON J

(appeal against sentence)

This judgment was delivered by me on …….. at ……… pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

AORANGI v POLICE [2025] NZHC 786 [4 April 2025]

Introduction

[1] On 26 February 2025, Dante Aorangi was sentenced to three months’ community detention, ordered to pay $5,000 in emotional harm reparation and disqualified from driving for 12 months1 following her guilty plea to a charge of careless driving causing death.2

[2]Ms Aorangi appeals against that sentence. She says it is manifestly excessive.

[3] I acknowledge at the very outset of this appeal that cases involving the careless use of a motor vehicle causing death are inevitably difficult. Sentences are often seen by a victim’s family as hopelessly inadequate. That is because a life has been lost through the actions of the defendant and yet the maximum sentence that could be imposed by a court for the offence is three months’ imprisonment or a $4,500 fine, coupled with mandatory disqualification.

[4] The facts of this case can be briefly stated and only serve to demonstrate that momentary inattention while driving, particularly on the open road, can have devastating and enduring consequences.

Facts

[5] On 28 January 2024, Ms Aorangi had not long turned 20 years old. At around 9:00 am that morning she departed Karamea driving a borrowed vehicle and heading for Lyttleton. She was accompanied by two passengers, her brother and her ex-step-mother. Ms Aorangi was on her learner licence, issued in November 2023. About 20 minutes out of Greymouth she pulled over to pick up Mr Snode who was hitchhiking. He sat in the left rear passenger seat.

[6] At around 3:30 pm, Ms Aorangi was driving along the Otira Highway. The open-road speed limit was 100 kilometres per hour. The road was dry, there was clear visibility and no wind. Ms Aorangi failed to guide the car through a very slight right curve in the road. The left wheels of the vehicle drifted into the loose gravel on the

1 Police v Aorangi [2025] NZDC 4309.
2 Land Transport Act 1998, s 38; maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment or $4,500 fine.

verge of the road. Ms Aorangi over-corrected and the vehicle rotated clockwise, causing it to slide across both lanes. The vehicle’s left rear corner impacted with a stone wall. Mr Snode died at the scene.

Victim Impact Statement

[7] Thirteen victim impact statements were provided to the Court at sentencing. Friends and family of Mr Snode wrote about him as an inspirational young man and the agony of the immeasurable loss they suffer. Mr Snode’s parents loved their son immensely and wrote of the pain of the police…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Aorangi v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NZHC 786
Decision Date: 4 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Dante Aorangi appealed against a sentence imposed by the District Court following her guilty plea to a charge of careless driving causing death. The sentence was three months’ community detention, a $5,000 emotional harm reparation payment, and a 12-month driving disqualification. Ms Aorangi argued the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court had to decide whether the sentence was manifestly excessive or inappropriate. The appellant contended that the sentencing judge failed to apply the Moses two-step process, resulting in an excessive sentence. The respondent argued that the judge's approach was not unorthodox and that the sentence was appropriate for the offence of careless driving causing death.

The court found that the sentencing judge’s approach was not unusual in cases where imprisonment was not a live issue and community-based sentences were imposed. The court also found that while it would have been helpful for the judge to have made a finding as to the gravity of Ms Aorangi’s carelessness, the level of culpability fell towards the lower end of the scale. The court was not satisfied that the sentence of three months’ community detention was manifestly excessive or inappropriate, given the appellant’s remorse and the probation officer’s recommendation.

The appeal was dismissed.

The court did not make any orders altering the sentence imposed by the District Court.

Orders