Kingi v Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI-2012-485-27 [2012] NZHC 1308

HARCHAM KINGI

Appellant

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         5 June 2012

Appearances: M Boyd and S Baigent for the appellant

A Whittaker for the respondent

Judgment:      12 June 2012

JUDGMENT OF CLIFFORD J

Introduction

[1]      The appellant, Harcham Kingi, was found guilty by Judge Behrens in the District Court at Porirua after a summary trial on 23 February 2012 of unlawfully taking a motor vehicle (s 266(1) Crimes Act 1961), dangerous driving (s 35(1)(b) Land Transport Act 1998) and driving with excess breath alcohol (s 56(1) Land Transport Act 1998). The Judge sentenced Mr Kingi:

(a)       to 80 hours community work and the payment of witness expenses of

$125.00 on the charge of unlawfully taking a motor vehicle;

KINGI v POLICE HC WN CRI-2012-485-27 [12 June 2012]

(b)      to disqualification from driving for 12 months and to pay reparation of

$20,650.00 on the charge of dangerous driving; and

(c)       to a fine of $800.00 on the charge of excess breath alcohol.

[2]      Mr Kingi now appeals his conviction and sentence and all other orders made by the Judge.

Facts

[3]      On  the  evening  of  26  June  2011  police  were  called  to  a  motor  vehicle accident at Woodman Drive in Porirua.  A Ford car had been driven at speed down the street, had lost control, crossed the footpath, destroyed a fence and come to rest against a house.  When the police arrived the two occupants of the car, the appellant Harcham Kingi and Sky Keelan (also known as Sky Moeke to whom I refer as Mr Moeke),were spoken to by the police.  Mr Kingi admitted to being the driver.  He underwent a breath screening test and, subsequently, an evidential breath test.  His breath test gave a result of 782 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.

[4]      It transpired that the Ford car belonged to Mr Moeke’s aunt and uncle – Mr Bo and Mrs Connie Matahaere – with whom he had been staying that night. Mr Kingi was driving the car without their consent.  The car was a write-off.  As a result, Mr Kingi faced the charges which ultimately led to his summary trial before Judge Behrens.

[5]      At   Mr   Kingi’s   summary   trial   the   police   evidence   was   given   by Mrs Matahaere,  two  local  residents  who  witnessed  the  incident  and  Constable Paterson, who had attended on the evening in question and carried out the breath testing procedure on Mr Kingi.  Mrs Matahaere was called first and gave evidence as to her and her husband’s joint ownership of the car and that it had been taken on the night  in  question  without  their consent.    In  cross-examination  by Ms  Boyd  for Mr Kingi, Mrs Matahaere also gave evidence that at a family conference she had attended as a result of, and shortly after, the accident, Mr Kingi and Mr Moeke had both said it was Mr Moeke who had been driving, and not Mr Kingi.

[6]      Mrs Matahaere shortly…