Mehrok v The Queen - [2021] NZSC 155

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI

SC 104/2021
[2021] NZSC 155

BETWEEN	SURENDER SINGH MEHROK Applicant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Court:	William Young, Glazebrook and Williams JJ
Counsel:	R J Stevens for Applicant E J Hoskin for Respondent
Judgment:	11 November 2021

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

Background

Mr Mehrok was convicted of manslaughter for killing a 14-week-old baby on 7 June 2016. He was 19 at the time. The baby belonged to his then-partner who had gone out at the time of the offence. Mr Mehrok attempted to soothe the baby when he began to cry, but was unsuccessful. Mr Mehrok eventually went into one of the bedrooms and threw the baby, causing massive head trauma.
Mr Mehrok was initially charged with and convicted of murder in 2017. He was retried following a successful appeal against conviction,[1] and found guilty of manslaughter in 2020.
[1]Mehrok v R [2019] NZCA 663.
In addition to the murder charge, Mr Mehrok was also charged in relation to multiple assaults on other children living in the same household. All of these occurred before the death of the baby. Mr Mehrok admitted responsibility for the baby’s death, and his assault charges were severed from the murder charge as a result.
Mr Mehrok was sentenced to seven years and nine months’ imprisonment for the manslaughter.[2] His appeal against sentence was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.[3] He seeks leave to appeal against that decision.

The application

[2]R v Mehrok [2020] NZHC 2722 (Gordon J) [HC judgment].

[3]Mehrok v R [2021] NZCA 370 (Brown, Brewer and Davison JJ) [CA judgment].

Mr Mehrok submits that his case raises three issues of general or public importance:
(a)whether a guilty plea discount precludes any further discount for steps taken to shorten proceedings;
(b)whether an uplift for the convictions in relation to the other children is appropriate where those convictions were entered after the date of the index offending; and
(c)whether it is appropriate to reduce a youth discount for lack of remorse and poor prospects of rehabilitation.
Mr Mehrok also submits that the reduction in youth discount in his case resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

Steps taken to shorten proceedings

Lower Court decisions

At sentencing, the High Court Judge declined to give Mr Mehrok a discount for taking steps to shorten his trial, as provided by s 9(2)(fa) of the Sentencing Act 2002.[4] The Court of Appeal upheld the decision, noting that admitting evidence that is plainly not in dispute will not usually attract a discrete discount.[5] Nor will there be more than one discount if a single concession also has the incidental effect of shortening the proceeding.[6] The Court agreed that Mr Mehrok’s admission of responsibility for the baby’s death should not result in a further discount for shortening the trial, as that was incidental.[7] And the severance of the assault charges was to Mr Mehrok’s advantage;…

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 Mehrok v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Mehrok v The Queen [2021] NZSC 155
Case: [2021] NZSC 155
Decision Date: 11 November 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Surender Singh Mehrok, sought leave to appeal against his conviction for manslaughter and the sentence of seven years and nine months' imprisonment. The Court of Appeal had already dismissed an appeal against his sentence. The appeal to the Supreme Court focused on three issues: whether a guilty plea discount precludes any further discount for steps taken to shorten proceedings; whether an uplift for the convictions in relation to other children is appropriate where those convictions were entered after the date of the index offending; and whether it is appropriate to reduce a youth discount for lack of remorse and poor prospects of rehabilitation. The Court found that the applicant's submissions did not have sufficient prospects of success to warrant the grant of leave. The Court noted that the concession of responsibility for the baby’s death and the severance of the assault charges did not warrant a further discount for shortening proceedings. Regarding the uplift for previous convictions, the Court held that the Court of Appeal was correct to impose an uplift for previous convictions even if those convictions were entered after the date of the index offence. Finally, the Court found that there were insufficient prospects of success on the issue of the youth discount, as the lower Courts had considered the specific facts of the case and the youth discount was appropriately reduced as a result of a lack of capacity for rehabilitation. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

Orders