Haerewa v The King - [2025] NZHC 1870

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2025-404-245

[2025] NZHC 1870

BETWEEN
KALEB HAEREWA

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 30 June 2025

Appearances:

S Brickell for Appellant

R N Benic and A F Afzaly for Respondent

Judgment:

10 July 2025

JUDGMENT OF WILKINSON-SMITH J

This judgment was delivered by me on 10 July 2025 at 10 am.

………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:
S Brickell, Auckland
Meredith Connell, Auckland

HAEREWA v R [2025] NZHC 1870 [10 July 2025]

Introduction

[1] Mr Haerewa appeals against a sentence of 10 months’ imprisonment imposed by Judge B A Gibson in the Auckland District Court in respect of one charge of assault with intent to injure.1 The sentence was cumulative on a two-year sentence of imprisonment imposed in the High Court for unrelated drug and property offending.

[2]The grounds of the appeal are that the sentencing Judge erred by:

(a)uplifting the starting point on account of the previous history;

(b)not considering and allowing a discount for relevant personal mitigating circumstances; and

(c)not making an adequate totality adjustment.

[3] The respondent opposes the appeal and submits that even if the Judge erred in uplifting the starting point for previous history, a commensurate uplift was available for offending on bail. The credit for mitigating factors and the totality adjustment was appropriate. The respondent submits that the resulting end sentence when considered across both sets of offending was not manifestly excessive.

The offending

[4] On 1 January 2024, just after 5 am, Mr Haerewa, the co-offender, and a female associate were in the Auckland CBD. The female complainant was in the same area with her friends including one friend who was 38 weeks’ pregnant. Mr Haerewa’s companions advanced on this group but an argument between the two ensued. Mr Haerewa tried to separate them. A verbal altercation began between the two groups. The complainant stepped in front of Mr Haerewa. Mr Haerewa and the complainant argued. The complainant told Mr Haerewa to get back into his car and “fuck off”. Mr Haerewa struck her face with such force that it knocked her to the ground rendering her unconscious. Mr Haerewa says that the female complainant spat

1 R v Haerewa [2025] NZDC 10143.

at his partner. That does not appear in the summary of facts but was not disputed by the respondent.

[5] The co-offender threatened the pregnant woman with an imitation firearm before dropping it on the ground. Mr Haerewa picked the imitation firearm up before the group left.

[6] The complainant was knocked unconscious for approximately three minutes and suffered a concussive head injury requiring hospital admission.

The sentencing decision

[7] The Judge began by noting that Mr Haerewa was 24 years of age at the time of sentencing and that the incident involving the two groups occurred on New Year’s Day. The Judge said that whatever happened led Mr Haerewa to commit a serious assault on one of the complainants in this matter. The…

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 Haerewa v The King

Details

AGLC: Haerewa v The King [2025] NZHC 1870
Case: [2025] NZHC 1870
Decision Date: 10 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Kaleb Haerewa appeals against a sentence of 10 months’ imprisonment imposed by the Auckland District Court for an assault with intent to injure. The sentence was cumulative on a two-year sentence for unrelated drug and property offending. Haerewa argues that the sentencing judge erred in uplifting the starting point on account of his previous history, not considering and allowing a discount for relevant personal mitigating circumstances, and not making an adequate totality adjustment. The Crown opposes the appeal, arguing that any error in uplifting the starting point was offset by the fact that the offending occurred while Haerewa was on bail, and that the credit for mitigating factors and the totality adjustment was appropriate.

The court considered whether the sentence imposed was outside the range available to the sentencing judge. The court noted that while an uplift of one month was available for offending while on bail rather than previous history, this error had not led to a manifestly excessive sentence. The court also considered whether a discount for youth, the impact of incarceration on Haerewa’s family, and the potential element of provocation could have been applied. The court agreed with the Crown that the focus in sentence appeals remains on the end sentence and not the process by which it was reached. The court found that the overall sentence of imprisonment was not out of proportion to the overall gravity of the offending as a whole.

The appeal is dismissed. The sentence imposed by the Auckland District Court is upheld.

Orders