Legal Research
Cases
Matete v Police

Matete v Police

Case [2022] NZHC 441 15 March 2022

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND GISBORNE REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TŪRANGANUI-A-KIWA ROHE

CRI-2022-416-000001

[2022] NZHC 441

FREDERICK DONALD MATETE

v

POLICE

Hearing: 2 March 2022

Appearances:

S Mitchell for the Appellant

M Mitchell for the Respondent

Judgment:

15 March 2022

JUDGMENT OF GRICE J

Introduction

[1] Mr Frederick Matete pleaded guilty to a charge of careless driving causing death. He was sentenced on 12 January 2022 in the Gisborne District Court to 12 months’ disqualification from driving as well as four months’ community detention.1

[2]Mr Matete appeals his conviction and sentence on the grounds that:

(a)the Court could have granted a discharge without conviction;2

1 Police v Matete [2022] NZDC 282 at [3].
2 Sentencing Act 2002, s 106.

MATETE v POLICE [2022] NZHC 441 [15 March 2022]

(b)the sentence was manifestly excessive, notwithstanding the tragic consequences of the offending, given the low level of carelessness involved.

[3] Mr Mitchell indicated Mr Matete’s disqualification has been suspended pending the appeal. Mr Mitchell was not aware of the exact period of disqualification served but thought it was in the vicinity of 3 weeks.

Background

[4] On Saturday 27 March 2021, Mr Matete was working a 12-hour shift driving a heavy truck and trailer combination unit. He began his shift at 5.00pm. He travelled to Wairoa and collected a load before returning to Gisborne. After emptying his load at Cedenco in Gisborne, Mr Matete decided to visit his children, who reside in Anzac Street. It was approximately 10.00pm.

[5] Mr Matete went inside the address leaving the truck running and the lights on. Shortly afterwards he returned to his truck and turned it off so he could have his break. When he did so, all the lights on the heavy vehicle combination also turned off.

[6] The victim completed his shift at Cedenco at 10.00pm. He was returning home on his 50cc scooter, travelling along Anzac Street. The victim failed to see the rear of the trailer unit as he approached it from behind, due to the unit not having lights on. The victim collided with the heavy vehicle combination, causing himself and the scooter to be wedged under the trailer unit. As a result of the injuries sustained from the collision, the victim died at approximately 11.12pm.

[7] In explanation, Mr Matete stated that when he turned the truck off, he turned on the night light. When later asked to do so by a Senior Constable at the scene of the accident, the defendant pushed the light on, but no lights worked on the heavy vehicle combination due to there being no light fitted.

[8] Mr Matete was charged with careless or inconsiderate vehicle operation causing death on a road.3

Lower court decision

[9] The District Court Judge emphasised that the offending related to carelessness and accepted that it was “without question” an accident, but that “[r]egrettably, it is [an accident] that could have been avoided if the defendant had complied with his obligations as the…

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 Matete v Police

Details

AGLC: Matete v Police [2022] NZHC 441
Case: [2022] NZHC 441
Decision Date: 15 March 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Frederick Matete appeals his conviction and sentence for careless driving causing death, arguing that the District Court should have granted a discharge without conviction and that the sentence of 12 months’ disqualification from driving was manifestly excessive. The High Court assessed the appeal against the refusal to grant a discharge without conviction and found it could not succeed as there was no evidence provided to support the claim that the consequences of conviction were out of all proportion to the gravity of the offence. The Court also examined the appeal against the disqualification from driving, finding that the 12-month disqualification period was manifestly excessive in this case. The appeal was allowed and the sentence was varied to replace the 12-month period of disqualification with a six-month period of disqualification. The remainder of the sentence imposed on the District Court remains.

Orders