Legal Research
Cases
Paul v Police

Paul v Police

Case [2019] NZHC 1650 16 July 2019

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2019-404-000153

[2019] NZHC 1650

BETWEEN
JONATHAN PAUL

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 8 July 2019

Appearances:

C Oxnam and S Papp for the Appellant H MacDonald for the Respondent

Judgment:

16 July 2019

JUDGMENT OF WOOLFORD J

This judgment was delivered by me on Tuesday, 16 July 2019 at 3:30 pm

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors: Public Defence Service (N Baier), Auckland
Meredith Connell (Office of the Crown Solicitor), Auckland

PAUL v NZ POLICE [2019] NZHC 1650 [16 July 2019]

Summary

[1] On 14 March 2019, the appellant, Mr Jonathan Raniera Paul, was sentenced in the District Court in respect of the following 18 charges:1

(a)Three charges of unlawfully taking a vehicle (CRN’s ending in 0535, 4830, 6005);2

(b)Two charges for dishonestly taking or using a document (CRN’s ending in 6006, 6008);3

(c)One charge of unlawfully getting into a vehicle (CRN ending in 6992);4

(d)Three charges of failing to answer District Court bail (CRN’s ending in 7568, 0173, 0119);5

(e)One charge of failing to answer police bail (CRN ending in 0963);6

(f)One charge of breaching conditions of intensive supervision (CRN ending in 3362);7

(g)One charge of breaching community work (CRN ending in 2745);8

(h)One charge of receiving (CRN ending in 6007);9

(i)One charge of wilful damage (CRN ending in 4828);10

1      Police v Paul [2019] NZDC 4817.
2      Crimes Act 1961, s 226. The maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment.
3      Crimes Act 1961, s 228. The maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment.
4      Crimes Act 1961, s 226(2). The maximum penalty is two years’ imprisonment.
5      Bail Act 2000, s 38. The maximum penalty is one years’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding
$2,000.
6      Bail Act 2000, s 24. The maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding
$1,000.
7      Sentencing Act 2002, s 70A. The maximum penalty is six months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $1,500.
8      Sentencing Act 2002, s 71(1)(a). The maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $1,000.
9      Crimes Act 1961, s 246. The maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment.
10     Summary Offences Act 1981, s 11. The maximum penalty is three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $2,000.

(j)One charge of failing to stop (CRN ending in 4826);11

(k)One charge of operating a vehicle carelessly (CRN ending in 4827);12

(l)Two charges of driving without a licence (CRN’s ending in 4829, 4246).13

[2] Judge Ronayne sentenced the appellant to three years and two months’ imprisonment.

[3] The appellant appeals that sentence on the grounds that it is manifestly excessive. The respondent, the New Zealand Police, opposes the appeal and submits that the sentence was plainly available to the Judge.

Summary of facts

[4]The District Court Judge divided the offending into groups:

(a)On 2 September 2015, the appellant unlawfully took a vehicle valued at $5,300 overnight (0535).

(b)On 25 March 2017, the appellant drove without a licence…

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 Paul v Police

Details

AGLC: Paul v Police [2019] NZHC 1650
Case: [2019] NZHC 1650
Decision Date: 16 July 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of Paul v Police was heard by Woolford J on 8 July 2019, with judgment delivered on 16 July 2019. The appellant, Mr Jonathan Raniera Paul, appealed against a sentence imposed by the District Court, arguing that it was manifestly excessive. The sentence, which totalled three years and two months' imprisonment, was imposed following Mr Paul's conviction on 18 charges including unlawful taking of vehicles, breaches of bail, and receiving stolen property. The District Court adopted a starting point of 18 months’ imprisonment for the most serious charge, an unlawful taking of a vehicle, and applied uplifts for other charges. The court did not specify discounts for the appellant's guilty pleas or time spent on electronic monitoring (EM) bail.

The court considered whether the starting point for the lead charge was appropriate, noting that the District Court's 18-month sentence was within range for such an offence. The court also determined that the uplifts applied by the District Court for the remaining charges were excessive, and that the overall sentence did not reflect the totality of the appellant's conduct. The court allowed the appeal, finding the sentence manifestly excessive, and substituted concurrent sentences totalling one year and eight months' imprisonment.

Orders