Grimme v Police - [2023] NZHC 3067

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI 2023-488-58

[2023] NZHC 3067

BETWEEN
ALEXANDER GRIMME

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 31 October 2023

Appearances:

M Nicholls for the appellant D Soich for the respondent

Judgment:

1 November 2023

JUDGMENT OF CAMPBELL J

[Appeal against Sentence]

This judgment was delivered by me on 1 November 2023 at 3.00 pm

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

GRIMME v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2023] NZHC 3067 [1 November 2023]

Introduction

[1] Mr Grimme pleaded guilty to a charge of careless driving causing death and a charge of careless driving causing injury. On 31 July 2023, Judge H B Shortland sentenced him to 290 hours’ community work, 18 months’ disqualification from driving, and required a $3,000 emotional harm payment to be made to a charity of the deceased’s family’s choice.1 Mr Grimme appeals the disqualification period of the sentence.

The Offending

[2] On 3 November 2022, Mr Grimme awoke at his Kerikeri home after sleeping for six hours. After exercising at his local gym for a couple of hours he left Kerikeri at about 7.30 am and drove in his car to Whangārei for a work-related course. Mr Grimme was the sole occupant of the car.

[3] On the way to Whangārei Mr Grimme stopped at Kawakawa for a coffee. The work course ran from 9 am to 5 pm. During that time Mr Grimme consumed further cups of coffee. He had a brief meal at the end of the course.

[4] He departed Whangārei at 5.15 pm to return to Kerikeri. Again, he was the driver and sole occupant of his car. On this journey Mr Grimme was observed on several occasions drifting into the opposing lane before making sudden corrections back into his own lane.

[5] At about 6.10 pm, after continuing along State Highway 10 past the intersection with Kerikeri Road, Mr Grimme approached a right-hand corner. He drifted into the southbound lane and suddenly corrected back into his own lane. The following corner was an easy left-hand bend. Mr Grimme again drifted into the opposing lane but did not correct himself, as he was asleep at the wheel.

[6] Aaron and Sandra Donaldson were driving in the opposite direction. The two cars collided head on. The Donaldsons’ car suffered extensive damage. Aaron Donaldson suffered severe injuries to his chest, abdomen and pelvis. Those injuries

1 New Zealand Police v Grimme [2023] NZDC 16908.

were fatal. Sandra Donaldson, who had been sitting in the front passenger seat, suffered facial bruising and cuts.

[7] At 6.27 pm, Mr Grimme sent a text message admitting he had fallen asleep. In further messages that evening, Mr Grimme said that he had messed up, was sorry for his actions, had fallen asleep and that he had killed someone.

District Court judgment

[8] Judge Shortland described the offending. He noted the impact the offending would continue to have on the Donaldson family and Mr Grimme.

[9] The Judge identified…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Grimme v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2023] NZHC 3067
Decision Date: 1 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand heard an appeal against sentence by Alexander Grimme, who was sentenced to 290 hours of community work, 18 months of disqualification from driving, and a $3,000 emotional harm payment. Grimme appealed the 18-month disqualification period, arguing it was manifestly excessive. The court examined whether the sentence was within the range that could be justified by accepted sentencing principles. The court considered the degree of Grimme's culpability, his culpability being higher than that of Ms Barr and Mr Simon but slightly below that of Mr Bassett and Mr Sidhu.

In reaching its decision, the court compared Grimme's case with several other cases involving careless driving causing death or serious injury, including Barr v New Zealand Police, Bassett v New Zealand Police, and Simon v New Zealand Police. The court found that Grimme's culpability was higher than that of Ms Barr and Mr Simon, but slightly below that of Mr Bassett and Mr Sidhu. The court also noted that Grimme had many personal factors in mitigation, such as his remorse, good character, early guilty plea, and contributions to the community. The court considered that in these respects, Grimme could not be distinguished from Ms Barr and Mr Bassett and was in a far better position than Mr Simon.

After considering the full suite of penalties imposed, particularly the period of any community work and the period of disqualification, the court found that the 18-month period of disqualification was manifestly excessive. The court considered that the period of disqualification for Grimme should not have exceeded 12 months. The court quashed the 18-month period of disqualification and substituted it with a 12-month period of disqualification.

The court allowed Grimme's appeal and substituted the 18-month period of disqualification with a 12-month period of disqualification, starting on the date of Judge Shortland's decision, 31 July 2023. The court did not alter the other parts of the sentence.

Orders