P v Police HC Wanganui CRI 2009-483-37

[2009] NZHC 2077

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WANGANUI REGISTRY

CRI 2009-483-37

P

v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Hearing:         6 November 2009

Counsel:         G Takarangi for Appellant

J M Woodcock for Respondent

Judgment:      6 November 2009

JUDGMENT OF SIMON FRANCE J (Appeal against Sentence)

[1]      This is a sentence appeal.  Mr P   pleaded guilty to assaulting his wife.  The couple had had an argument and his wife left the property.  Mr P   pursued her and grabbed her by the back of the neck in order to force her to come back home.

[2]      He was sentenced to fifty hours community work.  The sole ground of appeal is that a fine should have been imposed instead.  Concerning that the Judge took the view that since Mr P   was unemployed, he would not have a present ability to pay it and so that was inappropriate.  The Judge accepted that it was a minor assault but it was unwelcome and it was noted that Mr P   has a bad record.  In that regard I note

that in 2008 he was sentenced to supervision on male assaults female and in 2005

P V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC WANG CRI 2009-483-37 6 November 2009

imprisoned for aggravated  assault.   There is also a common assault conviction, described as domestic, from December 2005.

[3]      On appeal it is explained that Mr P   has current fines which he is paying by an arrangement with the Registrar, and he has met each payment.  The current total he  owes  is  only  $300,  and  accordingly  it  is  submitted  that  that  was  not  an impediment to a fine as the appropriate sentence.

[4]      The sole issue is whether it can be said that the Judge was wrong to choose community work ahead of a fine.  If a fine is appropriate, the Sentencing Act 2002 requires that to be imposed.   I consider it is a situation where reasonable people could take different views.   Standing alone a fine would probably best reflect the seriousness of the offence, but Mr P   has the previous convictions to which I have referred and has to realise that he must keep his hands to himself.  That factor makes the next level of sentence available, and I do not consider the Judge was wrong to adopt that.   However, I do amend the sentence by reducing it to the minimum amount of community work provided by the Act, which is forty hours.  This is to expressly reflect the guilty plea.

[5]      The appeal is allowed to the extent that the length of time is reduced by

10 hours.

Solicitors:

Simon France J

G H Takarangi, Graham Takarangi & Co, PO Box 72, Wanganui, email: [email protected]

J M Woodcock, Armstrong Barton, PO Box 441, Wanganui email: jo[email protected]