Falwasser v The Queen

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand recently dismissed the appeals of Isaac Hayes Falwasser and Rory Travers Smyth, who were convicted and sentenced for two separate aggravated robberies. The appeal focused on the arithmetical error in the calculation of the cumulative sentence imposed for the Shiraz Bar aggravated robbery. The appellants argued that the error led to a manifestly excessive sentence. However, the court found that there was no arithmetical error and that the total sentence was within range.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the Judge made an arithmetical error in calculating the cumulative sentence for the Shiraz Bar aggravated robbery and whether the total sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The court found that the Judge did not make an arithmetical error in calculating the sentence and that the total sentence was within range.

The court acknowledged that the two appellants committed serious offending, warranting a combined starting point of up to 14 years imprisonment before any adjustment for totality. The total uplift of nine months for previous convictions was arguably light, but the guilty plea discount was not. The court also noted that the effective overall end sentence for the two aggravated robberies compared appropriately with the overall end sentence in other cases involving sentencing for two aggravated robberies.

The appeals were dismissed, and the sentences imposed by the District Court were upheld. The court found that the total sentence of 10 years was within range and did not consider the sentence to be manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal emphasised that the focus on appeal was on whether the end sentence was manifestly excessive, and the court found that it was not.