Hira v Police - [2025] NZHC 2895

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2025-409-205

[2025] NZHC 2895

TONY LUCAS HIRA

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Hearing: 2 October 2025

Counsel:

C D Bean for Appellant G Collett for Crown

Judgment:

2 October 2025

ORAL JUDGMENT OF GENDALL J

[Sentence appeal]

Introduction

[1] On 5 August 2025, Mr Tony Hira, the appellant, was sentenced to two years one-and-a-half months’ imprisonment on charges of:1

(a)burglary;2

(b)assault on a person in family relationship (x2);3 and

(c)assaulting a person with blunt instrument.4

1      Police v Hira [2025] NZDC 18333 [decision under appeal].
2      Crimes Act 1961, s 231(1)(a)—maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 194A—maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 202C—maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.

HIRA v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2025] NZHC 2895 [2 October 2025]

[2] Mr Hira now appeals against that decision on the basis that the starting point adopted was not within the available range, and accordingly, the resulting sentence was manifestly excessive.

Background

The offending

[3]Turning to the background in this matter, I address first the offending.

[4] Mr Hira and the complainant of his offending had been in an on-and-off relationship for one year but they did not live together. On Thursday 17 October 2024 at about 8.00 pm, Mr Hira and the complainant were arguing at her home, and he then left the address. The complainant and her brother barricaded the front door, as they feared Mr Hira would return.

[5] Approximately four hours later at 12.30 am on 18 October 2024, Mr Hira returned to the complainant’s house. He attempted to unlock and open the front door, before kicking the door and forcing it open enough for him squeeze through and get inside. Mr Hira stormed up the stairs towards the complainant’s bedroom. He punched the complainant in her right eye with a closed fist, then threw an unknown item across the bedroom which struck her on the back of the head, cutting it and causing it to bleed. When the complainant went to leave her bedroom, Mr Hira picked her up by her arms causing bruising to both arms. He then came down the stairs, past the complainant’s brother, and asked him to go outside for a fight. Mr Hira then left after being informed Police were on the way.

[6] The complainant suffered a cut to the back of her head and bruising to her right eye and both arms as a result of the assault. The front door security chain was also broken from Mr Hira’s forced entry. When asked about the incident, Mr Hira acknowledged an altercation took place.

Pre-sentence report

[7] Turning now to the pre-sentence report. This notes that Mr Hira is assessed as a medium risk of harm and a medium risk of re-offending, as well as a high-risk family

harm perpetrator. Mr Hira proposed an address in Shirley, Christchurch for the purpose of an electronically monitored (EM) sentence. The report writer recorded…

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 Hira 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: [2025] NZHC 2895
Decision Date: 2 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Hira v Police, Mr Tony Lucas Hira appeals against his sentence for burglary and assault charges. The appeal focuses on whether the starting point adopted by the sentencing judge was within the available range and if the resulting sentence was manifestly excessive. Mr Hira was sentenced to two years and one-and-a-half months’ imprisonment for charges including burglary, assault on a person in a family relationship, and assault with a blunt instrument. The court's reasoning involved considering the starting point for the sentence, which was set at 32 months' imprisonment based on the totality of Mr Hira's conduct. The court examined whether this starting point was appropriate, considering factors such as the vulnerability of the victim and the premeditated nature of the crime. The court found that the starting point was within the available range and that the final sentence was not manifestly excessive. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The final orders of the court upheld the sentence imposed by the District Court, and the appeal was dismissed with no order for a new sentencing hearing.

Orders