R v Coade - [2024] NZHC 380

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2023-012-808

[2024] NZHC 380

THE KING

v

CAROLE ANN COADE

Hearing: 22 February 2024

Appearances:

R D Smith for Crown

S A Saunderson-Warner for Defendant

Judgment:

29 February 2024

SENTENCING REMARKS OF PRESTON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 29 February 2024 at pm, pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar
Date……………

R v COADE [2024] NZHC 380 [29 February 2024]

Introduction

[1] Carole Ann Coade, you appear today for sentence having pleaded guilty to the murder of your partner, Mark Willis.

[2] Before I move to my sentencing remarks, I begin by acknowledging all who are present in Court today or remotely attending.

[3] To the family and friends of Mark Willis, who was tragically taken from you, there is nothing I am able to say, or do, and no sentence which this Court can impose that can ever meet your loss. I acknowledge this. The sympathy of this Court is with you all. I acknowledge, also, those who support Carole Coade.

Sentencing Remarks

[4]I now address you Ms Coade.

[5] You may remain seated until I ask you to stand when I formally impose sentence.

[6] As I am sure you can understand, on the charge of murder, the law requires me to sentence you to life imprisonment unless your offending and your personal circumstances mean that it would be manifestly unjust to do so.1 Your lawyer contends that in the special circumstances of this case a sentence of life imprisonment would be manifestly unjust. The Crown argues otherwise.

[7] If I determine that the sentence of life imprisonment would not, in the circumstances, be manifestly unjust, I must then decide what minimum period of imprisonment (or “MPI” as you will hear me refer to it) you should serve.2 By law that can be no less than 10 years and in your case I must also consider whether a greater minimum period is required because of the special circumstances of the offending, or whether that would be manifestly unjust.3

1      Sentencing Act 2002, s 102.
2      Sections 103 and 104.
3      Section104.

[8] Central to my decision is the issue of your mental state at the time you offended. In short, your counsel submits it is unthinkable that you would have committed murder if not for your “severely unwell” mental state.

[9] Counsel for the Crown accepts that your mental health is relevant, but only to the extent it suggests a presumptive minimum period of imprisonment of 17 years is manifestly unjust, and the Crown seeks as you have heard a lesser minimum term.

[10] In determining those issues, I must take into account your personal circumstances, including the fact of your guilty plea and your previous impeccable good character. I will also refer to the purposes and principles of sentencing as they are set in the Sentencing Act 2002 (Act) and cases which are…

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 Coade

Details

AGLC: R v Coade [2024] NZHC 380
Case: [2024] NZHC 380
Decision Date: 29 February 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Carole Ann Coade has been sentenced to life imprisonment by the High Court of New Zealand for the murder of her partner, Mark Willis. The sentencing was presided over by Justice Preston on 29 February 2024. Coade had pleaded guilty to the charge of murder, which occurred on 18 May 2023. The court heard that Coade had a history of depression and had been experiencing a severe depressive episode at the time of the murder. She had attempted to drug Willis before stabbing him multiple times in the bath.

The court was required to determine whether a sentence of life imprisonment would be manifestly unjust given Coade's mental state at the time of the offence and her personal circumstances. The legal issues centred on the application of sections 102 and 104 of the Sentencing Act 2002, which address the presumption of life imprisonment for murder and the imposition of a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) for particularly brutal or callous murders. The court considered whether Coade's mental impairment sufficiently mitigated her culpability to warrant a sentence other than life imprisonment.

Justice Preston concluded that while Coade's severe mental illness significantly impacted her culpability, her actions were still brutal and callous, justifying the engagement of section 104. However, the court determined that an MPI of 11 years was appropriate, taking into account her mental state and other mitigating factors. The court further found that a sentence of life imprisonment was not manifestly unjust, given the risk Coade posed to public safety, particularly to future partners.

In addition to the life sentence with an MPI of 11 years, the court declined to impose a firearms prohibition order, as the question of Coade's eligibility for parole and conditions of release would be determined by the Parole Board.

Orders