Hurring v Police - [2020] NZHC 3309

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2020-412-000026

CRI-2020-412-000027 [2020] NZHC 3309

BETWEEN
STEPHEN JOHN HURRING

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 14 December 2020

Appearances:

D L Henderson for Appellant R D Smith for Respondent

Judgment:

15 December 2020

JUDGMENT OF DUNNINGHAM J

This judgment was delivered by me on 15 December 2020 at 9.30 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar
Date: 15 December 2020

Introduction

[1] Stephen Hurring was charged with threatening to kill, threatening to cause grievous bodily harm, possessing an offensive weapon and behaving threateningly. He was found guilty of behaving threateningly after a defended hearing, and pleaded guilty to the remaining charges. In a decision of 8 July 2020, Judge Crosbie sentenced

HURRING v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3309 [15 December 2020]

Mr Hurring to two years and five months’ imprisonment.1 Mr Hurring now appeals that sentence on the basis the starting point was manifestly excessive.

Facts

[2] The charge of behaving threateningly arose from events on 11 November 2018. Mr Hurring went to the victim’s address and shared some beer with the victim and her boarder. A verbal argument took place, resulting in the victim asking Mr Hurring to leave and calling the police. Mr Hurring called her several insulting names and as he left he said, “I’ll get someone to burn down your house”, mentioning the name of an arsonist who was known to both of them.

[3] The other charges arose on the evening of 15 August 2019. Mr Hurring was drinking at his neighbour’s house with several associates. He was highly intoxicated. At about 7.45 pm, Mr Hurring left the address and went across to his own house next door. He took two long-handled spears from his own property, returned to the neighbour’s house, and placed the spears against a cabinet in the lounge.

[4] Soon after, Mr Hurring and the first victim got into a heated discussion. Mr Hurring grabbed one of the spears and pointed it towards the victim, approximately 30 to 40 cm from the victim’s body. Mr Hurring said, “I will put it through your heart”, then “I’m going to kill you with it”. Others present attempted to calm Mr Hurring, telling him to put the spear down.

[5] Mr Hurring then turned the spear on the second victim, saying, “I could do the same to you, if I don’t get it through your heart I could stick it through your balls.” The third victim told Mr Hurring to stop, at which point he turned the spear towards her and said “be careful girl”. The third victim left the property, fearing for her safety.

[6] A short time later, Mr Hurring was outside on the porch area with the first victim. Mr Hurring was again pointing the spear at the victim in a threatening manner. The victim told him to calm down, which he did, putting the spear down.

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 Hurring v Police

Details

AGLC: Hurring v Police [2020] NZHC 3309
Case: [2020] NZHC 3309
Decision Date: 15 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Hurring v Police, Stephen Hurring appealed against the sentence imposed on him by Judge Crosbie. Mr Hurring had been found guilty of threatening to kill, threatening to cause grievous bodily harm, possessing an offensive weapon, and behaving threateningly. Following a defended hearing, Mr Hurring was found guilty of behaving threateningly and pleaded guilty to the remaining charges. The court sentenced Mr Hurring to two years and five months’ imprisonment, which he now appeals on the basis that the starting point was manifestly excessive. The High Court was required to determine whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and not justified by the relevant sentencing principles. The court considered the degree of premeditation, the specificity of the threats, the apparent willingness and ability to carry out the threats, the level of harm or fear caused to the victim, and whether the threat was made directly to the victim. The court also considered the fact that the offending occurred while Mr Hurring was on bail for similar offending. The court found that the starting point of two years and three months was on the high side, but if the fact that the offending occurred while Mr Hurring was on bail for similar offending was taken into account, there was no reason to adjust the starting point. The six month uplift for the other incident of offending was also appropriate, and took into account totality. The appeal was dismissed.

Orders