Mangi v R

[2018] NZHC 2732

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2018-463-87

[2018] NZHC 2732

BETWEEN

ANDREW MANGI

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Hearing:

3 October 2018

Appearances:

Further submissions completed:

S Mills for the Appellant J A Eng for the Crown

11 October 2018

Judgment:

23 October 2018

JUDGMENT OF POWELL J

This judgment was delivered by me on 23 October at 3.30 pm pursuant to R 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

Solicitors:

Lance Lawson, Rotorua Crown Law, Wellington

MANGI v R [2018] NZHC 2732 [23 October 2018]

[1]    Andrew Mangi has appealed a sentence of five months’ home detention imposed by Judge Hollister-Jones on 31 August 2018.1 He was sentenced on one charge of wounding with intent to injure.2

[2]    I must allow Mr Mangi’s appeal if I am satisfied that there is an error in the sentence, and a different sentence should be imposed. In any other case, I must dismiss the appeal.3 I will not intervene where the sentence is within the range that can properly be justified by accepted sentencing principles. But where the sentence imposed is manifestly excessive, intervention is required.4 Whether a sentence is “manifestly excessive” is to be assessed in terms of the sentence given, rather than the process by which it is reached.5

[3]    In his written submissions Mr Mills, on behalf of Mr Mangi, contended the sentence was manifestly excessive, as a result of the sentencing Judge:

(a)imposing a starting point that was excessive considering Nuku v R,6 and comparable cases;

(b)not granting a discrete discount for remorse and insight, but instead finding those personal factors were ‘set off’ by the implications of the three-strike regime, and his decision not to uplift for previous offending; and

(c)giving insufficient regard to the almost ten months Mr Mangi spent in custodial remand before his sentencing.

[4]I address each issue in turn.

1      R v Mangi [2018] NZDC 18513 [Sentencing Decision]. That decision followed Judge Hollister- Jones’ sentencing indication in R v Mangi DC Rotorua CRI-2017-077-1010, 27 July 2018 [Sentencing Indication].

2      Crimes Act 1961, s 188(2). The maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment.

3      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 250(3).

4      Tutakangahau v R [2014] NZCA 279, [2014] 3 NZLR 482 at [35].

5 At [36].

6      Nuku v R [2012] NZCA 584, [2013] 2 NZLR 39.

Issue One: Starting Point

[5]    Mr Mangi’s offending occurred close  to  midnight  on  28  October  2017.  Mr Mangi became involved in a street-side altercation with a relative of the complainant. When the complainant — celebrating at a function across the road — became aware of the situation he attempted to drag his relative away from the dispute and back towards the function. The complainant told Mr Mangi the matter was finished, but Mr Mangi remained aggressive.

[6]    Without warning, Mr Mangi went up to the complainant and punched him to the left of his head with his right arm. The…