Hodgson v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections HC Auckland Civ-2011-404-4052

[2011] NZHC 718

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CIV-2011-404-4052

BETWEEN  WIKI FRANCIS HODGSON Applicant

ANDCHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Respondent

Hearing:         13 July 2011

Appearances: Applicant in person

A Longdill for Respondent

Judgment:      13 July 2011

JUDGMENT OF TOOGOOD J

WF Hodgson, C/- Mt Eden Correction Facility, Private Bag 92625, Auckland 1150. A Longdill, Meredith Connell, Auckland:  [email protected]

HODGSON V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS HC AK CIV-2011-404-

4052 13 July 2011

[1]      Wiki Francis Hodgson is a prisoner in the Mt Eden Correctional Facility, serving a seven month sentence of imprisonment for a variety of offences, including excess blood alcohol.

[2]      By virtue of his  being  sentenced  to  a short  term  of imprisonment  he is entitled under s 86(1) of the Parole Act 2002 to be released on the date on which he has served half of his sentence.   Mr Hodgson was told when he was received at Mt Eden Facility that his release date would be 14 June 2011.  He became naturally concerned when he was told that in fact he was not to be released on that date, having made arrangements with the Prisoners’ Aid and Rehabilitation Society and others to get back into the community on that day.

[3]      He has applied for a Writ of Habeas Corpus under the provisions of the Habeas  Corpus  Act 2001.    In  terms  of  that  Act,  the  Chief  Executive  of  the Department of Corrections, who has the responsibility for detaining Mr Hodgson in custody, is required to establish that the detention of Mr Hodgson is lawful.  I have received an affidavit from Mr Woodman who is a Senior Operations Advisor for the Department of Corrections National Office, explaining how it is that Mr Hodgson has been detained beyond 14 June 2011.

[4]      It seems that at the time of Mr Hodgson being received at the prison the computer had shown a release date of 14 June 2011 based on incorrect information, so that the advice Mr Hodgson was given at the time he was received into the prison was incorrect.

[5]      I  am  satisfied,  having  read  the  evidence,  that  the  correct  calculation  of Mr Hodgson’s release date would see him released next Tuesday on 19 July 2011. That  is  because  his  seven  month  sentence of imprisonment  had  a  start  date of

2 May 2011.  He was entitled to credit for time served and half of his sentence would be 79 days.   That 79 day period expires, as I say, on 19 July 2011, and it can be expected that Mr Hodgson will be released on that date.

[6]      Mr Hodgson quite properly has said to me that he had planned for his release last month, and his “hopes were dashed”.  He deserves sympathy for having been put in the position of expecting release on a certain date and then being told he had one month further to serve.   Ms Longdill, who appears for the Chief Executive, has extended an apology on behalf of her client.  That was properly done.  Mr Hodgson has asked that the apology be put in writing.  It is not within my power to give that direction but I record that the request was properly made and that Mr Hodgson might be entitled to no less.

[7]      In the circumstances, however, I am satisfied that Mr Hodgson’s continued detention is lawful and I dismiss the application.

.........................................

Toogood J