Edwardson v Police - [2014] NZHC 43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

CRI-2013-470-99 [2014] NZHC 43

BETWEEN TIMOTHY EDWARDSON Appellant

ANDNEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 3 February 2014

Appearances: M J Hine for Appellant
A Hill for Respondent

Judgment: 3 February 2014

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J [on appeal against sentence]

TIMOTHY EDWARDSON v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2014] NZHC 43 [3 February 2014]

[1] Mr Edwardson pleaded guilty in the District Court to a large number of charges. These comprised six charges of burglary, one charge of theft, one charge of escaping from lawful custody, one charge of assaulting a female and one representative charge of breaching prison release conditions.

[2] On 8 November 2013, Judge McGuire sentenced Mr Edwardson to an effective term of two years imprisonment.1 Mr Edwardson appeals to this Court against sentence. He argues that the Judge erred by imposing a sentence of imprisonment, and that he ought to have imposed the less restrictive sentence of home detention.

The facts

[3] The offending in respect of which Mr Edwardson was sentenced occurred between 26 August and 23 October 2013. On 26 and 29 August 2013, Mr Edwardson entered four residential addresses at night and whilst the occupants were asleep. He removed property from each of those addresses. On 29 September 2013, Mr Edwardson entered another residential address and stole items from it. H did the same again the following day, 30 September 2013.

[4] On 1 October 2013, Mr Edwardson observed a vehicle parked in the driveway of a residential address. He approached the vehicle and removed a handbag from the passenger seat. On 2 October 2013, the police were called to Mr Edwardson’s address in relation to an unrelated matter. Whilst there, they discovered numerous items that Mr Edwardson had stolen during these burglaries.

[5] The assault charge arose as a result of an incident that occurred in the early hours of 3 October 2013. Mr Edwardson had consumed a considerable quantity of alcohol during that evening, and an altercation arose between Mr Edwardson and another person at the address. Mr Edwardson lashed out at this person and attempted to kick her. He missed the intended victim, and instead kicked his partner in the
stomach. She was heavily pregnant at the time.

1 New Zealand Police Department of Corrections v Edwardson DC Rotorua CRI-2013-063-
003360, 8 November 2013.

[6] The police were called, and took Mr Edwardson into custody. He took an opportunity to exit the police car, however, and ran away. The police chased him, and located him approximately 800 metres from the police vehicle.

[7] The charge of breaching prison release conditions arose as a result of release conditions imposed in the Tokoroa District Court on 23 January 2013. On 12 April
2013, Mr Edwardson signed an acknowledgment that he was required to report to his probation officer once every fortnight from 24 April 2013. Mr Edwardson failed to report on 5 June, 19 June, 3 July, 17 July, 31 July and 14 August 2013. This…

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 Edwardson v Police

Details

AGLC: Edwardson v Police [2014] NZHC 43
Case: [2014] NZHC 43
Decision Date: 3 February 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Edwardson appealed against his two-year sentence imposed by the District Court, arguing that the court should have imposed a sentence of home detention rather than imprisonment. The offences for which he was sentenced included multiple burglaries, theft, escaping lawful custody, assaulting a female, and breaching prison release conditions. The High Court considered whether the District Court judge had erred in imposing a sentence of imprisonment. The court reviewed Mr Edwardson’s history of dishonesty offences and his failure to comply with previous sentences of home detention and prison release conditions. The High Court held that, given Mr Edwardson’s history of offending and his failure to comply with previous sentences, the District Court judge was correct to impose a sentence of imprisonment to deter further offending and protect the community. The appeal against sentence was dismissed.

Orders