R v Esera - [2023] NZHC 2542

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2021-092-008196

[2023] NZHC 2542

THE KING

v

CORRDON FEMITIAI VAILOA ESERA

Hearing: 12 September 2023

Appearances:

A Kefu for the Crown

G Newell and D Dickinson for the Defendant

Judgment:

12 September 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF HARVEY J

Solicitors: Kayes Fletcher Walker, Manukau Counsel: G Newell, Barrister, Auckland
D Dickinson, Barrister, Auckland

R v ESERA [2023] NZHC 2542 [12 September 2023]

Introduction

[1] Corrdon Esera, at the age of 33, you appear this morning for sentence, having been found guilty by a jury of the murder of Misiona Talafu-Petelo. You will be aware that the maximum penalty for murder is life imprisonment.

The facts

[2] Mr Esera, you will know what happened on 16 October 2021 better than most. However, it is important that I address the facts during this sentencing since the law requires that it must be done in public, and that I refer to those facts that are directly relevant when setting the sentence that will be imposed. I will therefore refer in this sentencing to parts of the evidence given at trial.

[3] Mr Faataape, your co-defendant, was acquitted on the charge of murder as a party and of manslaughter. However, the jury accepted that, for you, the elements of the charge of murder were proven by the Crown beyond a reasonable doubt. You must accordingly be sentenced on that basis. So, I must determine the factual basis for sentencing, consistent with that verdict.1

[4] I repeat, the events that took place on 16 October 2021 will not easily be forgotten by you or by everyone else connected with the case. On that date you had planned to have drinks after work, at about 6:00 pm, with some work friends at the Oakwood Manor Motel on Massey Road in Māngere. When you arrived, a woman called Nastasija Barney was present. She was intoxicated and tried to hug you, which annoyed you. Ms Barney taunted you and said her partner, Mr Felotoi, would come to punch you. Mr Felotoi is Mr Talafu-Petelo’s father, and Ms Barney his stepmother.

[5] When Mr Felotoi and his associates arrived on a Suzuki Swift, he confronted you and accused a friend of not protecting his wife. It was about 7:00 pm when what Police described as a disorder incident happened. You left the address about 20 minutes before the Police arrived and drove to your home address in Manurewa.

1 Sentencing Act 2002, s 24(1).

[6] Once the Police had arrived, Mr Talafu-Petelo and his crew left the address on the Suzuki Swift. However, Mr Felotoi was arrested.

[7] Once at home you picked up a gun that you owned, an AR-15 military style semi-automatic rifle, and loaded some ammunition. You told your wife you were dropping off the gun at a friend’s house. You set off in your truck. Along the way you called a friend and asked him to drive you,…

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 Esera

Details

AGLC: R v Esera [2023] NZHC 2542
Case: [2023] NZHC 2542
Decision Date: 12 September 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, presided over the sentencing of Corrdon Femitiai Vailoa Esera, who was found guilty of the murder of Misiona Talafu-Petelo. Esera, aged 33, was convicted by a jury and faced the maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The court heard the events of 16 October 2021, where Esera, after a confrontation at a motel, retrieved a firearm, pursued the victim's vehicle, and fired shots, resulting in the death of Talafu-Petelo. Esera's co-defendant was acquitted, but the jury concluded that Esera's actions constituted murder. The court considered various legal issues, including whether the presumption in favour of life imprisonment should apply and the appropriate minimum period of imprisonment.

The court determined that the presumption in favour of life imprisonment for murder should not be disturbed in this case. Esera's culpability, premeditation, and the impact on the victim's family warranted the mandatory life sentence. The court also assessed aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon, premeditation, and fleeing the scene, and mitigating factors including Esera's personal background and efforts towards rehabilitation. After considering comparable cases and personal circumstances, the court set a minimum period of imprisonment of 11 years, reflecting the seriousness of the offence and Esera's culpability.

In summary, Esera was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of Misiona Talafu-Petelo, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 11 years. The sentence aims to hold Esera accountable, denounce his conduct, deter future offending, and protect the community. The court acknowledged the profound impact of the crime on the victim's family and considered Esera's personal circumstances and rehabilitation efforts in determining the sentence.

Orders