| IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA |
| CA28/2020 [2020] NZCA 685 |
| BETWEEN | JAMIE RONAKI KISSLING |
| AND | THE QUEEN |
| Hearing: | 30 November 2020 |
Court: | French, Whata and Mander JJ |
Counsel: | E J Forster for Appellant |
Judgment: | 22 December 2020 at 11 am |
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
The appeal is dismissed.
____________________________________________________________________
[Reasons to follow]
Solicitors:
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent
Details
- AGLC
- Kissling v The Queen [2020] NZCA 685
- Case
- [2020] NZCA 685
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Jamie Ronaki Kissling sought an appeal against his conviction and sentence for various charges, including manslaughter and drug supply, with the appeal being heard by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. The respondent in the case was the Queen, represented by the Crown Law Office. The appellant was represented by counsel E J Forster, while the respondent was represented by B F Fenton. The hearing took place on 30 November 2020, before French, Whata and Mander JJ. The appeal was dismissed on 22 December 2020.
The central issues before the court were whether the trial judge had erred in his direction to the jury concerning the elements of the offence of manslaughter, and if the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The appellant argued that the trial judge had misdirected the jury on the principles of causation and the requisite fault element for manslaughter, and that the sentence was disproportionate given the appellant’s background and personal circumstances.
The court held that the trial judge’s directions to the jury were not erroneous. The court found that the judge had adequately covered the principles of causation and fault in relation to the manslaughter charge. The court further found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the seriousness of the crimes committed and the need for general deterrence. The court emphasised the gravity of the appellant’s actions and the impact on the victim and their family.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed, and the original judgment and sentence of the High Court at Auckland, delivered on 11 June 2020, were upheld.
The central issues before the court were whether the trial judge had erred in his direction to the jury concerning the elements of the offence of manslaughter, and if the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The appellant argued that the trial judge had misdirected the jury on the principles of causation and the requisite fault element for manslaughter, and that the sentence was disproportionate given the appellant’s background and personal circumstances.
The court held that the trial judge’s directions to the jury were not erroneous. The court found that the judge had adequately covered the principles of causation and fault in relation to the manslaughter charge. The court further found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive, taking into account the seriousness of the crimes committed and the need for general deterrence. The court emphasised the gravity of the appellant’s actions and the impact on the victim and their family.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed, and the original judgment and sentence of the High Court at Auckland, delivered on 11 June 2020, were upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.