Briggs v The Queen - [2020] NZCA 453

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA204/2019
[2020] NZCA 453

BETWEEN	ARTHUR BRIGGS Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	23 July 2020
Court:	Clifford, Woolford and Dunningham JJ
Counsel:	S J Gray for the Appellant K S Grau for the Respondent
Judgment:	25 September 2020 at 10.30 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for an extension of time is granted.
BThe application to adduce fresh evidence is granted.
BThe appeal is allowed to the extent that the minimum period of imprisonment of seven years is quashed.
CThe sentence of ten years and six months’ imprisonment is confirmed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Woolford J)

This is an appeal against sentence by Arthur Briggs on the basis that the sentence imposed is manifestly excessive. Mr Briggs was convicted in the District Court at Wellington of one charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm,[1] three charges of injuring with intent to injure,[2] two charges of assault with a weapon[3] and five charges of assault.[4] On 10 May 2016, he was sentenced to 10 years and six months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of seven years.[5] He filed a notice of appeal three years later on 9 May 2019. Accordingly, Mr Briggs seeks leave from this Court to file the notice of appeal out of time.

Factual background

[1]Crimes Act 1961, s 188(1).

[2]Section 189(2).

[3]Section 202C.

[4]Section 196.

[5]R v Briggs [2016] NZDC 8326.

Mr Briggs was sentenced on a number of charges arising out of two incidents at the Rimutaka Prison. The first, more serious, incident occurred on 1 June 2012. The incident gave rise to a charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, three charges of injuring with intent to injure, two charges of assault with a weapon and four charges of assault. There were six victims: one a fellow inmate and the remaining five all Corrections officers. At the time of the incident, Mr Briggs was serving a sentence of nine years’ imprisonment for being party to the wounding of another inmate at another prison in March 2008.
That incident involved Mr Briggs and three others going into the cell of a Mr Matenga, a fellow inmate who had transferred to Rimutaka Prison in late May 2012. A fifth inmate stood at the door as a lookout. Mr Briggs and his fellow inmates punched Mr Matenga heavily in the face, held him down in a headlock and repeatedly punched and kicked him. For context, there had been rumours that Mr Matenga had “narked” on fellow prisoners about drug use. The lookout then warned Mr Briggs of the approaching Corrections officers.
Corrections Officer Dixon approached Mr Briggs in the cell. Mr Briggs then kicked the officer to the face and head, causing him to fall to the ground, where Mr Briggs kicked him twice, rendering the officer unconscious. Mr Briggs punched a second…

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 Briggs v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Briggs v The Queen [2020] NZCA 453
Case: [2020] NZCA 453
Decision Date: 25 September 2020 at 10.30 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Briggs v The Queen is an appeal against sentence by Arthur Briggs, who was convicted of one charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, three charges of injuring with intent to injure, two charges of assault with a weapon and five charges of assault. He was sentenced to 10 years and six months’ imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of seven years. He filed a notice of appeal three years later on 9 May 2019. Mr Briggs sought leave from the Court of Appeal to file the notice of appeal out of time. The Court considered the application for an extension of time was in the interests of justice, taking into account all relevant circumstances. The Court also considered the application to adduce fresh evidence was expedient in the interests of justice. The appeal was allowed to the extent that the minimum period of imprisonment of seven years is quashed. The sentence of ten years and six months’ imprisonment is confirmed.

Orders