Legal Research
Cases
Norman v The the Queen

Norman v The the Queen

Case [2022] NZHC 808 20 April 2022

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2022-409-37 [2022] NZHC 808

BETWEEN
THERESSA PHILLIPA CHEREE NORMAN

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

CRI-2022-409-38

BETWEEN

THERESSA PHILLIPA CHEREE NORMAN

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 12 April 2022

Appearances:

A J McKenzie for Appellant L Fiennes for Respondent

Judgment:

20 April 2022

JUDGMENT OF EATON J

This judgment was delivered by me on at pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

NORMAN v R [2022] NZHC 808 [20 April 2022]

Introduction

[1] Ms Norman pleaded guilty to Crown charges of robbery,1 theft under $500 (x2)2 and using a document for pecuniary advantage (x3).3 She also pleaded guilty to four police charges of theft under $500.4

[2] On 3 March 2022 Ms Norman was sentenced to two years and six months’ imprisonment by Judge Gilbert.5 She appeals this sentence on the grounds it is manifestly excessive.

Facts

Theft and using a document charges

[3] Between 10 December 2020 and 15 January 2021 Ms Norman stole groceries from New World. The total value of the groceries was $443.29.

[4] On 26 February 2021 Ms Norman stole meat products totalling $155.60 from Countdown.

[5] In the afternoon of 6 March 2021 Ms Norman stole a handbag containing bank cards from a parked car in Cashmere. She used the bank cards to buy goods at Z Energy Cashmere worth $171. Ms Norman then attempted to purchase a $200 Mitre 10 gift voucher from a supermarket and $49.99 worth of goods from Super Liquor, but the transactions failed.

[6] The next day Ms Norman used a bank card which had been stolen from a handbag in a parked car in the Groynes. She used the bank card to purchase goods from Z Energy Belfast worth $116.90. Ms Norman also attempted to use the bank card four times at New World Northwood but was only successful on one occasion. Also on 7 March 2021, Ms Norman used a credit card which had been stolen from a vehicle on Rapaki Road. She purchased $100 worth of goods from St Martins Garage,

1      Crimes Act 1961, ss 234 and 66; maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
2      Section 219 and 223(d); maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment.
3      Section 228(1)(b); maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 219 and 223(d); maximum penalty of three months’ imprisonment.
5      R v Norman [2022] NZDC 3675.

$200 worth of goods from Mitre 10 and $600 worth of goods from Countdown Colombo Street. Ms Norman also attempted to purchase $266.35 worth of KFC.

[7] On 8 March 2021 Ms Norman stole $25.90 worth of herbs and cheese from Countdown Eastgate.

Robbery charge

[8] In the morning of 17 April 2021 Ms Norman and her partner, Mr Tairi, went to the victim’s home, where she lives with her three children. They had known the victim for about two years and were let into the house by her three-year-old…

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 Norman v The the Queen

Details

AGLC: Norman v The the Queen [2022] NZHC 808
Case: [2022] NZHC 808
Decision Date: 20 April 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Theresa Philippa Cheree Norman, the appellant, has appealed against her sentence of two years and six months’ imprisonment for robbery, theft under $500 (x2), and using a document for pecuniary advantage (x3). Additionally, she was charged with four instances of theft under $500 by the police. The High Court of New Zealand heard the appeal on April 12, 2022, with appearances made by A J McKenzie for the appellant and L Fiennes for the respondent. The judgment was delivered by Eaton J on April 20, 2022. The central issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, given the nature and circumstances of the offence.

The court considered the appellant's submissions, which included that the uplift for previous convictions and offending while on sentence was excessive, and that there was a mathematical error in calculating the end sentence. The court also examined whether the Judge failed to consider the totality principle and dismissed the appellant's letter of apology, display of remorse, and willingness to attend restorative justice. The court found that the 15 per cent uplift was excessive, but the sentence of two years and six months' imprisonment was not manifestly excessive. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

In conclusion, the High Court of New Zealand upheld the sentence imposed on Theresa Philippa Cheree Norman for her criminal activities, including robbery, theft, and using a document for pecuniary advantage. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and dismissed the appeal.

Orders