IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NEW PLYMOUTH REGISTRY
CRI 2013-443-000014 [2013] NZHC 944
PETER THOMAS KOHU
v
NEW ZEALAND POLICE
Hearing: 30 April 2013 (via AVL) Counsel: N R Harding for Accused
S A Law for Crown
Judgment: 2 May 2013
JUDGMENT OF SIMON FRANCE J
[1] Mr Kohu appeals an overall sentence of 12 months imposed on
16 January 2013.[1]
[1] Police v Kohu DC Hawera CRI 2012-021-000916, 16 January 2013, Judge Roberts.
Facts
[2] This case involves domestic violence. By way of background, Police had in the preceding years been called to 11 domestic incidents at the home Mr Kohu shares with his partner and their four children. None, however, had resulted in charges. Mr Kohu is 25 years old, and has a significant offending history, although only one common assault charge in 2004. Several of the offences involve drink driving, and their almost inevitable progeny of driving while disqualified. There are also
numerous lower level property offences.
[3] The first of the incidents resulting in the present charges occurred on
26 September 2012. Mr Kohu’s partner returned home to be greeted with an accusation of sleeping around. In the course of the ensuing argument Mr Kohu pressed his clenched fist against his partner’s forehead, and shoved her.
[4] Then on 5 November 2012, whilst on bail for the preceding incident, in breach of those conditions but seemingly without objection from his partner, Mr Kohu was at home. Alcohol was being consumed, a common feature in Mr Kohu’s offending. Also present was his de facto mother-in-law who had been living with the couple for about six months, along with her partner. It seems this arrangement was a source of stress.
[5] For reasons not disclosed, Mr Kohu started to search a jacket his mother-in-law had brought to the house. This led to a verbal altercation, which Mr Kohu’s partner momentarily quelled. However, yelling “I am going to smash you b...h”, Mr Kohu ran into the room where his mother-in-law was. He punched her above the eye causing her to fall to the bed. He then shut the door, trapping her in and others out. He then punched her again to the nose and mouth causing a bloody nose. His mother-in-law screamed and Mr Kohu ran from the house.
[6] His partner located him outside. Mr Kohu approached her and used both hands to slap her simultaneously on either side of her face, causing her to stagger. He accused her of not supporting him, and went inside. His partner rang the Police, at which point Mr Kohu left.
[7] Mr Kohu was arrested. After discussions, he pleaded guilty to: (a) common assault for the first incident;
(b) assault with intent to injure her for the second incident; (c) common assault for the slapping assault on his partner.
Sentencing
[8] The pre-sentence report identified alcohol as a key contributing factor. Mr Kohu was assessed as a medium risk of re-offending. Letters were filed by Mr Kohu and his…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Kohu v Police and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2013] NZHC 944
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appeal centred on the starting point of 12 months and the factors that led to the uplift. The defence argued that the punches to the head did not satisfy the R v Taueki factor of assaults to the head, and that multiple victims were effectively double-counted. However, the court held that the 12-month starting point was appropriate, given the nature of the offences and the need to take an overview of the offending. The court also considered the uplift to be at the upper limit but did not see a basis to disturb it on appeal.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, stating that the sentence was appropriate given the seriousness of the offences and the need for appropriate sentencing for domestic violence. The court emphasised the importance of considering the seriousness of each factor and taking an overview of the offending. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, and the 12-month sentence was 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.