Brattle-Hemara Haeana v Police

[2021] NZHC 2165

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE PAPAIOEA ROHE

CRI-2021-454-23

[2021] NZHC 2165

BETWEEN

CHEA PARATENE CHARLES BRATTLE- HEMARA HAEANA
Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:	18 August 2021 (AVL)
Counsel:	P A Walker for Appellant J J Harvey for Respondent
Judgment:	18 August 2021

JUDGMENT OF SIMON FRANCE J

[1]    Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana appeals a sentence of 13 months’ imprisonment imposed on a number of charges – breach of protection order (x 2), common assault, assaulting police, wilful damage, threatening behaviour (x 2) and failure to answer bail.1 The sentence followed upon a sentencing indication of that figure. That indication included credit for a guilty plea but no other mitigating factors. The Judge said he would consider that issue at sentencing, which he did but decided no further adjustment was appropriate. Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana appeals that aspect of the sentence.

[2]    Matters referred to at the District Court, and again on appeal, include remorse, a letter of apology and efforts at rehabilitation. Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana had indicated a willingness to engage in restorative justice, but it did not occur. Mr Brattle- Hemara Haeana has also made contact with Raukawa Whānau Ora, an iwi-based entity

1      New Zealand Police v Brattle-Hemara Haeana [2021] NZDC 14669.

BRATTLE-HEMARA HAEANA v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 2165 [18 August 2021]

that offers various health and well-being services and courses. Ms Walker submits that these are matters which the Act recognises and which regularly are given some material recognition in the sentencing and this should have occurred here.

[3]    The respondent’s submissions are reflected in the decision and need not be separately detailed.

Decision

[4]    The offending on which Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana was sentenced involved his former partner who is the mother of three children with Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana. One night the appellant asked to spend the night on her floor. This was allowed but things turned nasty. Some time in the evening the appellant tried to get in her bed; she resisted. Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana jumped on top of her and punched her repeatedly. At some point he was locked outside but smashed the back door to get in, and then further assaulted the victim.

[5]    Two months later, Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana was arrested on a different matter. He resisted and once in the police car he spat at one of the officers.

[6]    Five months later, on 7 January 2021, Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana parked in the driveway next door to his former partner’s address. By this time protection orders were in place. The appellant made contact with his four-year-old child in breach of the orders, and then drove off when police arrived.

[7]On 26 January the appellant failed to appear in court as required.

[8]    On 13 February Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana made contact through a video call with his children knowing the former partner would be there. On that call he threatened, in the hearing of the children, to shoot his former partner. He later made a gun gesture at the former partner’s mother when she confronted him over his conduct.

[9]    The Judge accepted the letter showed remorse but no understanding of the effect of the conduct on the victim. No reason was otherwise given for no further discounts.

[10]   Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana was the beneficiary of a forward-looking sentencing exercise.  This is apparent in a generous, in my view,  starting point of   16 months’ imprisonment and from the sentencing remarks. The Judge encouraged Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana to get assistance. This observation of the District Court sentencing is made not to criticise but rather to explain why I consider the appeal is without merit.

[11]   The offending involved two significant assaults on a woman in her home. One involved a home invasion. There were two charges of threatening behaviour that could have been more seriously charged and a totally unacceptable assault on the police as well as breaches of Court orders. Some offences must have been committed while on bail and Mr Brattle-Hemara Haeana has a considerable history of this type of offending.

[12]   The starting point of 16 months was generous and a final sentence less than the current 13 months’ imprisonment is not available. It would not meet the purposes of the Act, nor adequately respond to this offending. It follows that whether some small allowance for the matters raised on appeal could have been made could not affect the outcome.

[13]The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Simon France J

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Palmerston North