IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY
CRI-2014-463-95 [2015] NZHC 81
BETWEEN PETER BILL GRAY
Appellant
AND
NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
Hearing: 4 February 2015 Counsel:
M McGhie for appellant
JJ Rhodes for respondentJudgment:
4 February 2015
(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF FAIRE J
Solicitors: M McGhie, Papamoa
Ronayne Hollister-Jones Lellman, Tauranga
Gray v New Zealand Police [2015] NZHC 81 [4 February 2015]
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................[1] Facts .......................................................................................................................[4] District Court Decision ..........................................................................................[9] Ground of Appeal .................................................................................................[12] Approach to appeal against sentence ...................................................................[13]
Appellant’s submissions .............................................................................................
Firearms charges [19] Excess breath alcohol charge [21]
Respondent’s submissions....................................................................................[25] Firearms charges [26] Excess breath alcohol charge [28]
Relevant Law .............................................................................................................
Firearms charges [30] Excess breath alcohol charge [35]
Analysis ......................................................................................................................
Firearms charges [39] Excess breath alcohol charge [48] Vehicle confiscation order [52] Community work and disqualification from driving [56]
Result....................................................................................................................[57]
Introduction
[1] Mr Gray was sentenced on the following offences by Judge Bidois on
26 November 2014:
(a) Two charges of unlawful possession of firearm and explosives (shotgun and ammunition) under s 45 of the Arms Act 1983. The maximum penalty for the offence is four years’ imprisonment;
(b) Four charges of presenting a firearm at a person under s 52(1) of the
Arms Act. The maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment;
(c) Driving with excess breath alcohol, third or subsequent, under s 56(1) of the Land Transport Act 1998. The maximum penalty is two years’ imprisonment.
[2] Mr Gray received the following sentences and orders for the whole offending:
(a) 12 months’ home detention; (b) 280 hours’ community work;
(c) Disqualification from driving for one year and one day;
(d) Confiscation of a motor vehicle pursuant to s 129 of the Sentencing
Act 2002.
[3] Mr Gray appeals the sentence on the basis that it was manifestly excessive.
Facts
[4] On the afternoon of 1 August 2014 Mr Gray consumed some alcohol. In the late afternoon Mr Gray, together with a male associate drove to visit Mr Gray’s friend at the friend’s place of work. Mr Gray made some enquiries as to the whereabouts of his friend and was told by a worker that his friend was still at work. Mr Gray and his associate then left the address and drove to Mr Gray’s address a short distance away. There Mr Gray took a firearm and ammunition that belonged to his grandfather-in-law (who is also resident at the address) and returned to the place of work of his friend.
[5] Upon his return he approached and spoke to a group of persons who were standing outside the premises. One member of the group and Mr Gray exchanged heated words, at which point the worker called Mr Gray a “dog” – a colloquial term for a member of the Mongrel Mob. Mr Gray went into his car (in view of the group) and produced the shotgun and ammunition. He loaded the gun in front of the group as I understand it, and lifted it, scanning with it at all members of…
Continue reading Gray v Police
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Gray v Police [2015] NZHC 81
- Case
- [2015] NZHC 81
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.