R v Gledhill - [2009] NZCA 415

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA443/2009
[2009] NZCA 415
THE QUEEN
v
JADE GLEDHILL
Hearing:3 September 2009

Court:Glazebrook, Gendall and Asher JJ
Counsel:C P Brosnahan for Appellant

H A Wrigley for Crown

Judgment:18 September 2009 at 9.30 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The appeal is allowed.
BThe sentence of two years and one month’s imprisonment is quashed and substituted by a sentence of 11 months’ home detention.
COn 21 September 2009 at 10.00 am, Ms Gledhill is to go immediately to her home at 25 Plunket Street, Wanganui, and await the arrival of the probation officer and a representative from the monitoring company. She is to reside at 25 Plunket Street, Wanganui, for the duration of the home detention. She is to undertake and complete any counselling, programme and/or course to reduce her risk of re-offending as may be directed by her probation officer. She is not to consume or have in her possession alcohol or illicit drugs for the duration of the home detention.
____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Asher J)
Introduction
[1]        On 8 July 2009, the appellant, Jade Gledhill (“Ms Gledhill”), pleaded guilty to one count of wounding with reckless disregard for the safety of others (s 188(2) of the Crimes Act 1961). The maximum penalty for that offence is seven years’ imprisonment. Two days later, on the morning of the trial, she pleaded guilty to the remaining count in the indictment, participating in an organised criminal group (s 98A of the Crimes Act). On 27 July 2009, she was sentenced by Judge Radford (“the sentencing Judge”) in the District Court in Wanganui on both charges to two years one month’s imprisonment.
[2]        The appellant now appeals this sentence. It is submitted on her behalf that the starting point was fixed was too high, and that insufficient credit was given for mitigating factors relating to her. It was also submitted that her sentence was not properly on a parity with that of a co-offender, William Robertson, who received a sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment. It was submitted that the sentence was not in accordance with the sentence indication that had been given by the sentencing Judge on 27 February 2009.
Background
[3]        On the morning of Wednesday 4 June 2008, Ms Gledhill and a group of associates, who were all members or associates of the Tribesmen gang, were driving through Victoria Avenue, Wanganui. The group occupied two vehicles that were travelling together. As they travelled along the street they came across three patched Mongrel Mob gang members who were standing outside a vehicle. Those members started gesturing gang slogans towards the appellant’s group, which in turn replied with their own abuse.
[4]        The vehicle containing Ms Gledhill stopped. The occupants got out and made their way towards the Mongrel Mob members. Ms Gledhill, as she got out, picked up a cricket bat. The yelling and verbal abuse between the two groups turned into a fight involving wrestling and…

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 Gledhill

Details

AGLC: R v Gledhill [2009] NZCA 415
Case: [2009] NZCA 415
Decision Date: 18 September 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal against the sentence imposed on Jade Gledhill was heard by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. Ms Gledhill had pleaded guilty to one count of wounding with reckless disregard for the safety of others and one count of participating in an organised criminal group. She was sentenced to two years and one month’s imprisonment by Judge Radford in the District Court in Wanganui. The appellant appealed this sentence, arguing that the starting point was too high and insufficient credit was given for mitigating factors. The appeal court found that the arithmetic and chain of reasoning in the sentencing decision were difficult to follow and determined the appropriate sentence afresh. The court concluded that the appropriate starting point for the appellant’s offending was approximately two years and eleven months’ imprisonment. The court also found that a total discount of approximately one-third was appropriate, leading to an end sentence of just under two years’ imprisonment. The court held that home detention was the correct sentence for Ms Gledhill, given her remorse and efforts to turn her life around. The appeal was allowed, and the sentence of two years and one month’s imprisonment was quashed and substituted by a sentence of 11 months’ home detention.

Orders