Osborn v Police - [2025] NZHC 1818

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2025-409-117

[2025] NZHC 1818

BETWEEN
HADLEY HAYDEN OSBORN

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 3 July 2025

Appearances:

B S T Moore for Appellant G J Barrett for Respondent

Judgment:

3 July 2025

JUDGMENT OF MANDER J

This judgment was delivered by me on 3 July 2025 at 4 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date: .

OSBORN v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2025] NZHC 1818 [3 July 2025]

Introduction

[1] Hadley Osborn (aged 46) pleaded guilty to one charge of driving contrary to a zero-alcohol licence1 and one charge of driving with excess breath alcohol being his third offence.2 He was sentenced by Judge Couch to six months’ home detention.3 Mr Osborn appeals that sentence on the grounds the starting point imposed was too high and that insufficient credit was afforded to him in recognition of his addiction issues and rehabilitative efforts. It is argued these errors resulted in the imposition of a period of home detention which was an inappropriate sentence and manifestly excessive. He argued a dual sentence of community detention combined with intensive supervision should have been imposed.

Facts

[2] On 13 December 2022, Mr Osborn became subject to a zero-alcohol licence. On 16 October 2024, he was stopped at an alcohol checkpoint. He returned a positive breath screening test, and a subsequent evidential breath test resulted in a reading of 1139 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. He admitted having consumed two ciders before driving. This was Mr Osborn’s third conviction for driving with excess blood/breath alcohol.

District Court Decision

[3] The Judge regarded the gravity of the offence as high. He noted Mr Osborn had exceeded the legal alcohol limit by more than four times for a driver on an ordinary licence. He, of course, was on a zero-alcohol licence.

[4] The Judge adopted a starting point of 16 months’ imprisonment for both offences, which included the aggravating factor of his previous driving offences. A 25 per cent deduction was given for prompt guilty pleas which resulted in an adjusted starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment.

1      Land Transport Act 1998, s 32(1)(b) and (3); maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment or
$4500 fine.
2      Sections 56(1) and (4); maximum penalty two years’ imprisonment or $6000 fine and 12 months disqualification.
3      Police v Osborn [2025] NZDC 11222.

[5] In considering whether a less restrictive sentence was appropriate, the Judge considered that community detention would not satisfy the purposes of the Sentencing Act 2002, particularly the need for denunciation, deterrence and protection of the public. The Judge ultimately imposed six months’ home detention, with standard and special conditions to apply until six months after the detention end date.

[6] A concurrent sentence of one month home detention was imposed on the zero- alcohol licence offence. He was also disqualified for six months from obtaining a driver licence, to commence in…

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 Osborn v Police

Details

AGLC: Osborn v Police [2025] NZHC 1818
Case: [2025] NZHC 1818
Decision Date: 3 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hadley Osborn appeals against his sentence for driving with excess breath alcohol while on a zero-alcohol licence. The District Court imposed six months' home detention, which Osborn contends was an inappropriate sentence and manifestly excessive. He argues that a dual sentence of community detention combined with intensive supervision should have been imposed. The appeal raises questions about the appropriate starting point for sentencing, the consideration of personal mitigation factors, and whether the chosen sentence was the least restrictive option available.

The appeal hinged on whether the starting point was too high, if sufficient credit was afforded to Mr Osborn in recognition of his addiction issues and rehabilitative efforts, and whether home detention was the least restrictive outcome available to meet sentencing purposes. The court found that while the starting point should have been between 12 and 14 months, the judge did not explicitly reference the personal mitigation factors in his sentencing remarks. The court concluded that community detention and intensive supervision would have more appropriately met the principles and purposes of sentencing in this situation, including deterrence and Mr Osborn’s rehabilitation needs.

The appeal against sentence is allowed. The six-month sentence of home detention is quashed. A sentence of four months’ community detention and six months’ intensive supervision is substituted on the charge of aggravated driving with excess breath alcohol. The one month sentence of home detention on the charge of driving contrary to a zero alcohol licence is also quashed and substituted with a concurrent sentence of one month’s community detention. The recommended special conditions and curfew set out in the pre-sentence report are to apply. All other sentences and orders remain in place.

Orders