Meyerhoff v Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI-2012-409-000086 [2012] NZHC 3216

ANNA CHRISTINA MEYERHOFF
Appellant
v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE
Respondent

Hearing: 29 November 2012

Appearances: A G Ogilvie for Appellant
K Basire for Respondent

Judgment: 29 November 2012

ORAL JUDGMENT OF FOGARTY J

[1] This is an appeal against a decision of the District Court, Judge H M Simpson. The appellant was stopped at a checkpoint and blew 1,048 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath, the statutory maximum being 400. This is more than double the statutory maximum.

[2] The Judge imposed a sentence of two years’ disqualification plus a period of indefinite disqualification plus 300 hours’ community work. Helpfully Ms Basire for the Crown has acknowledged that this sentence is manifestly excessive and the Crown suggests against the authorities that an appropriate sentence would have been
12 months’ disqualification and either 120 to 150 community hours or $2,000 in

fines.

ANNA CHRISTINA MEYERHOFF V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC CHCH CRI-2012-409-000086 [29
November 2012]

[3] Mr Ogilvie for the appellant takes no issue with the 12 months which is a minimum period so the issue has really been one of community work or fines. The appellant is in employment. She works as a barista. Mr Ogilvie relying on the recent case of Blyth v Police[1] argues the appropriate penalty in this sort of case is a fine, so the issue comes down to whether the fine should be $2,000 as suggested by the Crown or less. There is some discussion of that in Blyth. I am more focused on
making sure that the fine is paid and I have discussed with Mr Ogilvie and have confirmation from his client who is present in court that she can in fact afford payment of a fine at $50 per week and I have built up the fine this way.

[1] Blyth v Police [2012] NZHC 875

[4] The result of this appeal is the appeal is allowed, the penalties are quashed. The new penalties are disqualification for 12 months and a $1,500 fine to be paid at the rate of $50 per week. Because s 65 of the Act applies there will also be indefinite disqualification.

Solicitors:
Better Lawyers Ltd, P O Box 13-921 Christchurch - [email protected]
Raymond Donnelly & Co, Christchurch – [email protected]

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand heard an appeal brought by Anna Christina Meyerhoff against the New Zealand Police. The case arose from an incident where Meyerhoff was stopped at a checkpoint and found to have an alcohol level of 1,048 micrograms per litre of breath, which is more than double the statutory limit of 400 micrograms. The District Court imposed a sentence of two years’ disqualification, an indefinite disqualification period, and 300 hours of community work. Meyerhoff appealed against the severity of this sentence, arguing it was excessive.

The appeal focused on the appropriateness of the sentence, particularly the duration of the disqualification period and the nature of the penalty imposed. The Crown conceded that the original sentence was excessive and suggested an appropriate penalty would be 12 months’ disqualification, either 120 to 150 hours of community work, or a fine between $2,000 and $1,500. Meyerhoff’s counsel argued for a fine, relying on the recent case of Blyth v Police, and presented evidence that Meyerhoff could afford to pay a fine of $1,500 at the rate of $50 per week.

The court allowed the appeal and set aside the original penalties. The new penalties imposed were 12 months’ disqualification, a $1,500 fine to be paid at the rate of $50 per week, and indefinite disqualification under section 65 of the relevant Act.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established