R v Burns - [2025] NZHC 1082

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2021-092-9236 [2025] NZHC 1082

THE KING

v

KELLY-ANNE BURNS

Hearing: 2 May 2025

Counsel::KFR Karpik for Crown JA Philson for Defendant

Sentence: 2 May 2025

SENTENCING NOTES OF WILKINSON-SMITH J

Solicitors/Counsel:
Great South Chambers, Auckland Kayes Fletcher Walker Ltd, Auckland

R v BURNS [2025] NZHC 1082 [2 May 2025]

Introduction

[1] Ms Burns, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty in this Court to:

(a)one charge of conspiracy to injure with intent to injure;1 and

(b)one charge of failure to answer bail.2

The offending

[2] In November 2021, a conflict arose between your daughter, Jimel Burns-Wong-Tung, and the deceased, Mr Ngaronoa. Mr Ngaronoa said that Ms Burns-Wong-Tung’s young child, your grandchild, had done something wrong. That was the catalyst for what followed.

[3] On 21 November 2021 your daughter Ms Burns-Wong-Tung, her then partner Mr Hemopo, you and your then partner Rocky Ngapera, and Rocky’s brother Thomas Ngapera planned to take Mr Ngaronoa to Ms Burns-Wong-Tung to sort out their conflict, and it seems that what was anticipated was that Mr Ngaronoa would receive a “hiding”.

[4] Mr Ngaronoa was 22 years old and was the nephew of your partner, Rocky Ngapera.

[5] You all agreed to meet at an address in Clendon to give Mr Ngaronoa a “hiding”.

[6] Police obtained CCTV footage which captured the attack on him which led to his death.

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 189(2) and 310; maximum penalty five years’ imprisonment.
2 Bail Act 2000, s 38(b); maximum penalty one year’s imprisonment or $2,000 fine.

[7] Your daughter went to the address with her partner Mr Hemopo in a Honda Accord. Your daughter was sitting in the front passenger seat, and there were two other males sitting in the back.

[8]Your daughter messaged you to tell you that she was in Clendon.

[9] You then drove to the Clendon address in a Toyota and stopped next to Mr Hemopo’s vehicle.

[10] Within a minute or so of you arriving, Thomas Ngapera drove a Ford Escape motor vehicle onto the address. Your partner, Rocky Ngapera, was in the front passenger seat. They had Mr Ngaronoa with them. As I have said, he was their nephew.

[11] Thomas Ngapera exited the vehicle and spoke with Mr Hemopo through the window of the Honda, while you repositioned your vehicle and parked it on the footpath.

[12] The two males from the car your daughter arrived in got out of the Honda and approached Mr Ngaronoa. Thomas Ngapera told them that only Ms Burns-Wong-Tung was to touch Mr Ngaronoa.

[13] Ms Burns-Wong-Tung then got out of the Honda and approached the Ford. She appeared to pass a concealed object from her right hand to her left hand.

[14] Ms Burns-Wong-Tung spoke to Mr Ngaronoa through the open window and demanded that he open the door, which it seems he did. Ms Burns-Wong-Tung leaned into the rear right door…

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 R v Burns

Details

AGLC: R v Burns [2025] NZHC 1082
Case: [2025] NZHC 1082
Decision Date: 2 May 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Kelly-Anne Burns appeared before the Auckland Registry of the High Court for sentencing after pleading guilty to conspiracy to injure with intent to injure and failure to answer bail. The court heard that Burns conspired with others to assault Mr Ngaronoa, which resulted in his death. Burns' role in the conspiracy was less active than that of some co-offenders, but she was present during the assault and did not intervene. The court also considered Burns' failure to answer bail, for which she evaded police for over a year. The court set a starting point for the conspiracy charge of two years and six months' imprisonment, reflecting the harm caused and the aggravating factors present. An uplift of six months was added for the bail failure, resulting in a global starting point of three years' imprisonment. Various personal factors were considered, including Burns' previous convictions, remorse, time spent on electronically monitored bail, personal circumstances, and guilty pleas. The court applied a one-month uplift for previous convictions, a ten percent reduction for guilty pleas and personal difficulties, resulting in a final sentence of two years and nine months' imprisonment for the conspiracy charge and six months for the bail failure, to be served concurrently.

### Final Orders
- Burns is sentenced to two years and nine months' imprisonment for conspiracy to injure with intent to injure.
- Burns is sentenced to six months' imprisonment for failure to answer bail.
- The sentences are to be served concurrently.

Orders