Campbell v The Queen - [2017] NZCA 623

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA629/2016
[2017] NZCA 623

BETWEEN	DANIEL JOHN CAMPBELL Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	14 November 2017
Court:	Brown, Courtney and Toogood JJ
Counsel:	T Aickin for Appellant M J Lillico and A B Richards for Respondent
Judgment:	20 December 2017 at 3.00 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal is granted.
BThe application to adduce further evidence on appeal is granted.
CThe appeal against conviction is dismissed.
DThe appeal against sentence is allowed. The sentence of three years and three months’ imprisonment imposed on the charge of injuring with intent to injure is quashed and a sentence of two years and six months’ imprisonment is substituted.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Toogood J)

Introduction

Following a two-day jury trial in the District Court at Christchurch, the appellant, Daniel John Campbell, was found guilty of one charge of injuring with intent to injure.[1] He had represented himself at the trial. Mr Campbell was sentenced by Judge Garland on 9 November 2016 to three years and three months’ imprisonment.[2]
[1]Crimes Act 1961, s 189(2).
[2]R v Campbell [2016] NZDC 22507.
Mr Campbell filed his notice of appeal out of time and consequently requires an extension. As the delay is minimal and explained, we grant the application for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal.
Mr Campbell initially appealed to this Court against both his conviction and sentence. After several difficulties with the conviction appeal were raised in the course of the hearing, however, we adjourned briefly to enable Ms Aickin, who appeared for Mr Campbell, to receive further instructions. She informed the Court that Mr Campbell wished to abandon his conviction appeal and the hearing proceeded solely as an appeal against sentence. In light of that, we formally dismiss the appeal against conviction.
In his appeal against sentence, Mr Campbell argues that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because:
(a)he suffers from mental impairment that was not taken into account; and
(b)his limited criminal history and the gaps between previous offending were not given due weight.

The background facts

Mr Campbell lived in a council housing block, with one flat separating the two addresses where Mr Campbell and the complainant lived. At around 7.30 pm on Saturday 9 May 2015 Mr Campbell became concerned about the volume of music being played by the complainant and one of the other neighbours. Mr Campbell walked over onto the complainant’s property, approached the neighbours and told them to be quiet or he would sort them out. He struck the complainant “a couple of times” in the chest before returning to his flat.
The complainant went over to Mr Campbell’s flat a short time later to apologise and ask why he had been struck. Mr Campbell picked up a knife in each hand and then attacked the complainant, punching him and striking him four times with his elbow. This knocked…

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 Campbell v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Campbell v The Queen [2017] NZCA 623
Case: [2017] NZCA 623
Decision Date: 20 December 2017 at 3.00 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Daniel John Campbell appealed against his conviction and sentence for injuring with intent to injure. Campbell was sentenced to three years and three months’ imprisonment by Judge Garland. The appeal was heard by Brown, Courtney and Toogood JJ. The Court granted the application for an extension of time to file the notice of appeal and the application to adduce further evidence on appeal. The appeal against conviction was dismissed and the appeal against sentence was allowed. The sentence was quashed and a sentence of two years and six months’ imprisonment was substituted.

The Court considered the arguments put forward by both parties. Campbell argued that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because he suffers from mental impairment which was not taken into account and his limited criminal history and the gaps between previous offending were not given due weight. The Crown argued that there was no error in the sentence imposed. The Court found that Campbell’s paranoid schizophrenia was a significant contributor to the offending and that a discount of 25 per cent from the three-year starting point — nine months’ imprisonment — would have been appropriate to reflect the reduced level of blameworthiness. Therefore, the Court substituted a sentence of two years and six months’ imprisonment.

Orders