R v Dunn - [2016] NZHC 2552

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2015-004-012282 [2016] NZHC 2552

THE QUEEN

v

DARRELL DUNN

Hearing: 26 October 2016

Appearances:

P J L Arnold for Crown
P J Kaye for Prisoner

Judgment:

26 October 2016

SENTENCING REMARKS OF PALMER J

Solicitor/Counsel:
Meredith Connell, Auckland
P J Kaye, Barrister, Auckland

R v DUNN [2016] NZHC 2552 [26 October 2016]

Introduction

[1] Mr Darrell Dunn, on 9 September 2016 you were convicted of manslaughter by a unanimous jury, under ss 171, 160(2)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961.

[2] On 10 November 2015 you caused the death of Mr Teina Wharawhara by intentionally doing an unlawful act that carried the risk of more than trivial harm. This was manslaughter. The seriousness with which this is viewed in New Zealand is reflected in the maximum sentence which may be imposed: life imprisonment. I now have to decide what sentence should be imposed for your conviction.

Facts

[3] You knew Mr Teina Wharawhara. He was 42, an alcoholic and smaller than you. You were both streeties – members of the homeless community in Auckland. You met up with him during the afternoon of 10 November 2015. You and he, and another homeless man, walked to Outhwaite Park in Grafton, by the Auckland Domain, arriving about 8 pm. There, you and he and three others sat at a picnic table talking, drinking alcohol and listening to music on Mr Wharawhara’s phone – having a good time, until it wasn’t.

[4] You and Mr Wharawhara argued – perhaps over the use of his phone or him not being passed drinks. He was irritating you. You hit him and he fell off the bench to the ground. He got back up. You said at trial that Mr Wharawhara said he was going to fuck you up. You said he lunged at you with a knife but no knife was found and no other witness saw a knife. One other witness did say he saw Mr Wharawhara come towards you and you put your hands up. He heard you yell out “Fuck, did you stab me?”

[5] You hit Mr Wharawhara again several times. You kicked something – the Crown says you kicked him in the head. You say you kicked the knife away. No one else saw what you kicked.

[6] The medical evidence is that Mr Wharawhara suffered multiple bruises to his face and head, bruising, lacerations to the internal and external surfaces of his lips,

and some quite serious internal bruising to the neck. There was microscopic bleeding and swelling to Mr Wharawhara’s brain. His back was bruised, and so was the top of his head. The cause of his death was blunt force head trauma. The pathologists agreed that the combination of your punches and/or kicks, combined with Mr Wharawhara’s brain being small due to being an alcoholic, caused his death. He died soon after the attack.

[7] Afterwards, you left Outhwaite Park almost immediately after the attack. You wandered into town…

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 Dunn

Details

AGLC: R v Dunn [2016] NZHC 2552
Case: [2016] NZHC 2552
Decision Date: 26 October 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Darrell Dunn was convicted of manslaughter for the death of Teina Wharawhara, following a physical altercation that resulted in fatal injuries. The High Court of New Zealand was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for Dunn's conviction under sections 171 and 160(2)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961. The legal issues included establishing a starting point for the sentence, assessing mitigating and aggravating factors, and applying the principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act 2002. The court considered the nature of the offending, Dunn's extensive criminal history, and the impact of his actions on Wharawhara's family. The court concluded that the appropriate starting point was six years and three months' imprisonment, adjusted upwards by nine months for Dunn's history of violent offending and an additional six months for committing the offence while on parole. After considering these factors, the court sentenced Dunn to a total of seven years and six months' imprisonment. This decision reflects the need to balance accountability, deterrence, and the protection of the community, while also considering Dunn's potential for rehabilitation.

Orders