Barakat v Police

Link copied
Case Copied 17 min read

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

CRI-2012-454-000006 [2012] NZHC 1671

BETWEEN  RICKY JOHN BARAKAT Appellant

ANDNEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing:         13 July 2012

Counsel:         T C Thackery for Appellant

E C Killeen for Respondent

Judgment:      13 July 2012

ORAL JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J

Introduction

[1]      On 8 June 2011 Mr Barakat pleaded guilty in the Levin District Court to nine charges.  Six of the charges were for theft.  He also pleaded guilty to one charge of burglary, one charge of threatening to injure and one charge of breaching the conditions of his release from prison.

[2]      On 24 August 2011 Judge Behrens QC sentenced Mr Barakat to an end sentence of two years and five months’ imprisonment.  The end sentence imposed in relation to each charge was:

(1)       Theft on 17 February 2011 – three months; (2)           Theft on 17/18 February 2011 – one year;

(3)       Theft on 17/18 February 2011 – three months;

BARAKAT V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC PMN CRI-2012-454-000006 [13 July 2012]

(4)       Theft on 22 February 2011 – six months; (5)   Theft on 3 March 2011 – one year;

(6)       Theft on 3 March 2011 – three months;

(7)       Breach of release conditions – two months;

(8)Threatening   to   injure   on   17   February  2011   –   convicted   and discharged;  and

(9)       Burglary  on  18  February  2011  –  two  years  and  five  months’

imprisonment.

The offending

[3]      Mr Barakat’s first offending occurred on 17 February 2011.  He visited The Warehouse  in  Levin.    Mr  Barakat  entered  that  shop  with  his  partner  and  two children.  He handed his children a small trolley and they walked to the front door and  pushed  it  through  the  sensors  which  were  not  activated.    They  returned. Mr Barakat then placed a DVD player (valued at $99.99) and a CD player (valued at

$69.99) in the trolley and they left the store.

[4]      When leaving the store, a store assistant approached him and asked to see his receipts.  Mr Barakat became extremely aggressive and threatened the store assistant. The store assistant backed off.  Mr Barakat drove away.

[5]      At some point between 8.30pm on 17 February 2011 and 3.30pm on 18

February 2011 Mr Barakat entered a private property in Otaki.  Mr Barakat went to the  back  of  the  property  and  found  two  unlocked  cars.    From  one  he  took  a Panasonic car stereo, two CD wallets containing 60 CDs and an owner’s manual (valued at $1,826.35).  From the other vehicle he took a GPS unit, two CDs, a sales compendium containing business documents, an ASB MasterCard, three Westpac credit cards and a Loyalty Card (valued at $702.60).

[6]      On 18 February 2011 at about 12.30pm Mr Barakat entered the Paper Plus stationery store on Oxford Street, Levin.  Mr Barakat entered the front door and went straight to the back of the store.  He approached a door marked “Staff Only” through which was a storage area, kitchen, bathroom and the owner’s office.   He looked around to make sure no one was watching.   He then…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Barakat 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
[2012] NZHC 1671
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Barakat v Police, Ricky John Barakat appealed against the sentence imposed on him by Judge Behrens QC in the Levin District Court. Barakat was sentenced to two years and five months' imprisonment after pleading guilty to multiple charges, including theft, burglary, threatening to injure, and breaching the conditions of his release from prison. The appeal was heard in the High Court of New Zealand at Palmerston North Registry.

The legal issues in the appeal were whether the starting point for the burglary charge was too high, whether the six-month uplift for previous convictions was too high, whether credit should have been given for remorse expressed in a letter, and whether home detention should have been considered.

The Court considered the starting point for the burglary charge, which it found to be inappropriately high. The Court concluded that a starting point of 18 months' imprisonment was more appropriate, given the relatively low degree of premeditation and the minimal damage caused. The Court also determined that an uplift of nine months was appropriate to reflect the totality of the offending. Considering the personal factors, the Court found that an uplift of between nine to twelve months would not have been unreasonable for Barakat's previous convictions. The Court deducted two months for Barakat's apparent remorse and further deducted 25% for his guilty plea.

Based on its analysis, the Court concluded that the sentence imposed by the District Court was within the range of sentence that could be imposed. Therefore, the appeal against the sentence was dismissed. However, the Court expressed concern that Barakat requires careful medical and psychological assistance to properly re-integrate into society and avoid reoffending. The Court urged the authorities to provide the necessary assistance to Barakat.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.