Huang v The King - [2023] NZHC 2337

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2023-404-000266

[2023] NZHC 2337

BETWEEN
YONGHAO HUANG

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing:
7 August 2023

Further memoranda filed on 18 August 2023 for Appellant, and on 25 August 2023 for Respondent

Appearances:

P E Dacre KC for Appellant

I L M Archibald for Respondent

Judgment:

25 August 2023

JUDGMENT OF VAN BOHEMEN J

[appeal against sentence]

This judgment was delivered by me on 25 August 2023 at 3:30 pm Registrar/Deputy Registrar
……………………………..

Counsel/Solicitors:
P E Dacre KC, Auckland Crown Solicitor, Auckland

HUANG v R [2023] NZHC 2337 [25 August 2023]

[1] On 24 May 2023, Yonghao Huang was sentenced by Judge N R Dawson to two years and eight months’ imprisonment after pleading guilty to and being convicted of six charges of money laundering.1 Mr Huang appeals his sentence on the grounds that the Judge’s starting point was excessive and that the Judge gave insufficient discounts for Mr Huang’s personal circumstances and other factors. The Crown opposes the appeal.

[2] At the same time as Mr Huang was sentenced, Judge Dawson sentenced two co-offenders, Nathan Nauer and Vetekina Naufahu, in relation to the same money laundering offending. Mr Nauer and Mr Naufahu also appealed their sentences. Their appeals were heard together before Mr Huang’s appeal but a decision on their appeals had not been issued when Mr Huang’s appeal was heard.

[3] Because the outcome of Mr Nauer’s appeal, in particular, could be relevant to Mr Huang’s appeal, I agreed with counsel that I would not decide Mr Huang’s appeal until the decision on the appeals by Mr Nauer and Mr Naufahu had been issued and counsel had had an opportunity to make written and oral submissions if they wished.

[4] In a judgment dated 10 August 2023, Edwards J allowed the appeals by Mr Nauer and Mr Naufahu and set aside the sentences imposed in the District Court.2 Her Honour found that a sentence of home detention was available for Mr Nauer and adjourned Mr Nauer’s appeal pending production of a report on the suitability of the proposed home detention address.3 Her Honour sentenced Mr Naufahu to a significantly shorter period of imprisonment under which he was eligible for release on the basis of time served.4

[5] In the light of this decision, I made timetable orders for counsel for Mr Huang and Crown counsel to file further submissions and to seek a further hearing if they wished.5 I also directed that an updated pre-sentence report be prepared to assess the suitability of Mr Huang’s home address for home detention.

1      R v Nauer [2023] NZDC 10329.
2      Naufahu v R [2023] NZHC 2129
3      At [62] – [63].
4 At [110].
5      R v Huang HC Auckland CRI-2023-404-000266, 11 August 2023 (Minute of van Bohemen J).

[6] Counsel for Mr Huang and for the Crown both filed further submissions. Neither asked to make oral submissions.

The offending

[7] Mr…

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 Huang v The King

Details

AGLC: Huang v The King [2023] NZHC 2337
Case: [2023] NZHC 2337
Decision Date: 25 August 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Yonghao Huang appealed his sentence of two years and eight months’ imprisonment for six counts of money laundering, arguing the starting point was excessive and the discounts were insufficient. Huang was involved in laundering $420,000 derived from drug dealing by his co-offenders, Nathan Nauer and Vetekina Naufahu, though Huang had no direct connections to drug dealing himself. The High Court had earlier allowed appeals by Nauer and Naufahu against their sentences. Counsel for Huang argued the starting point should be lower since Huang was only reckless as to the source of funds and did not derive significant profits. Crown counsel opposed the appeal, arguing the starting point was appropriate given the amount of money laundered and that parity with the co-offenders was achieved through discounts. The Court agreed with Huang that the starting point was too high and that the discount for his previous good character was inadequate. The Court also found the discount for remorse was too low given Huang’s unqualified acceptance of responsibility. Considering these factors, the Court found a sentence of home detention was appropriate and set aside Huang’s sentence of imprisonment, substituting a sentence of nine months’ home detention.

Orders