Barron v The King - [2025] NZHC 2531

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2025-404-344

CRI-2025-404-345 [2025] NZHC 2531

BETWEEN
HAYDEN BARRON

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 2 September 2025

Appearances:

P Masani for Appellant

C F Hodgson for Respondent

Judgment:

2 September 2025

ORAL JUDGMENT OF VENNING J

[Appeal against sentence]

Solicitors: Meredith Connell, Auckland Counsel: P Masani, New Lynn, Auckland

BARRON v R [2025] NZHC 2531 [2 September 2025]

[1] Hayden Barron pleaded guilty to two representative charges of breaching a protection order, and charges of assaulting a person in a family relationship, seven charges of theft, obtaining by deception, receiving and one charge of shoplifting. On 3 June 2025, Judge S J Lance sentenced Mr Barron to 28 months’ imprisonment.1 Mr Barron appeals the sentence. He accepts the sentence of imprisonment was the least restrictive outcome but submits the term of 28 months was itself manifestly excessive.

[2] The Judge referred to the offending in his sentencing notes in relation to the family violence as psychologically abusing the victim between June 2023 and November 2023, often calling her a whore, and threatening to pimp her out. On one of the occasions Mr Barron assaulted her by throwing a cigarette at her head and twisting her arm. He also had unauthorised contact with her by sending a series of verbally abusive messages between November 2023 and August 2024. In addition to that family violence offending, Mr Barron stole items from New World to a value of
$133.50. The obtaining by deception involved a rather strange incident of hiring a van through Facebook Marketplace and then damaging it. The receiving related to a paraglider which had been stolen which Mr Barron attempt to resell. Then there were several charges of theft from various Bunnings stores and a Guthrie Bowron store together with petrol from two petrol stations.

[3] The Judge considered a starting point of 21 months for the domestic violence offending was appropriate and uplifted that by 15 months to take account of all the other offending resulting in a total of 36 months for a start point. The Judge then allowed credits of 20 per cent for the guilty plea (which he considered generous, but which was the agreed position); five per cent for a successful restorative justice meeting with the victim of the domestic abuse and remorse; five per cent for personal background, noting he had been subjected to abuse and violence himself; and five per cent for his attempts at rehabilitation. In total the discounts amounted to 35 per cent. Rounded up to Mr Barron’s benefit that led to the end nominal sentence of 23 months. The Judge uplifted that by four months to take account of the previous convictions, which disclosed a propensity for that type of offending and that some of the offending had occurred whilst on bail. The Judge then also remitted all Mr Barron’s fines to give

1 R v Barron [2025] NZDC 12323.

him a…

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.

Continue reading Barron v The King

Details

AGLC: Barron v The King [2025] NZHC 2531
Case: [2025] NZHC 2531
Decision Date: 2 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hayden Barron appeals against the sentence imposed by Judge Lance, who sentenced him to 28 months imprisonment for multiple charges including breaching a protection order, assault, theft, obtaining by deception, receiving stolen property, and shoplifting. Barron argues that the 28-month term is excessive despite accepting imprisonment as the least restrictive sentence. The offending includes psychological abuse and physical assault against a family member, along with multiple theft and deception offenses. The Judge considered a starting point of 21 months for the domestic violence, uplifted by 15 months for other offenses, leading to an adjusted starting point of 36 months. After applying discounts for the guilty plea, restorative justice, remorse, personal background, and rehabilitation efforts, the sentence was set at 23 months, then increased by four months for previous convictions and one month for remitting fines, resulting in the 28-month sentence. Barron's counsel argues for a greater discount for restorative justice, remorse, and rehabilitation efforts, suggesting a sentence of 23 months would be appropriate. However, the Court finds the combined deductions and the overall sentence were within the appropriate range and dismisses the appeal.

Orders