Charges:
Plea:

Manslaughter x1

Being in charge of a motor vehicle causing injury x5

Guilty

Appearances:

M B Smith for Crown
J W Watson for Prisoner

Sentenced:

17 September 2013

SENTENCING NOTES OF VENNING J

Solicitors: Crown Solicitor, Whangarei
Neilsons Lawyers, Auckland

Copy to: J W Watson, Whangarei

R v GUEST [2013] NZHC 2432 [17 September 2013]

[1] Samuel Jack Guest, you are for sentence in this Court having pleaded guilty to manslaughter and five counts of being in charge of a motor vehicle causing injury. Manslaughter carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

[2] Because you have pleaded guilty to manslaughter I confirm and enter a conviction for manslaughter. As a consequence I am required to give you a warning in terms of the three strikes legislation which I now do. Given the conviction for manslaughter you are now subject to the three strikes law. I am giving you a warning of the consequences of another serious violence conviction. You will also be given a written notice outlining those consequences which list serious violent offences. If you are convicted of any serious violence offences other than murder, committed after this warning, and if a Judge imposes a sentence of imprisonment, you will serve that sentence without parole or early release. If you are convicted of murder committed after this warning, then you must be sentenced to life imprisonment. That will be served without parole unless it would be manifestly unjust. In that event the Judge must sentence you to a minimum term of imprisonment.

[3] At the outset I would like to acknowledge those affected by the offending who are here today. I should say that the sentence this Court has to impose on Mr Guest is by no means an attempt at a measure of the value of the life his actions have taken or the consequences of his offending on that night. The sentence is society’s response to the offending through the judicial system.

[4] I deal with the circumstances. At about 10 o’clock on 10 November last year you drove to a tavern south of Dargaville where there were birthday celebrations. While you were there you were drinking beer. At about 1 o’clock in the morning of the next day you got into your car. Four of your friends, Matthew Rawiri-Woollam, Justin Friedrich, George Whippy and Michael Thurston also got into your car. When you were leaving two others approached and asked if they could get a ride with you into Dargaville. They were Anthony Matich and Shane Rapana.

[5] You drove off with all six passengers in your car. Your car was a hatchback. It had seating for five people, including you, the driver. Two of the passengers were

were still trying to shut the rear hatch as you drove off. You accelerated your car towards Dargaville getting up to well over 100 kilometres an hour.…

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 Guest

Details

AGLC: R v Guest [2013] NZHC 2432
Case: [2013] NZHC 2432
Decision Date: 17 September 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Venning J sentenced Samuel Jack Guest on charges of manslaughter and five counts of being in charge of a motor vehicle causing injury. Guest pleaded guilty and was sentenced to imprisonment. The court was required to consider various legal issues, including the appropriate sentence for manslaughter and the circumstances of the offence. The court also had to take into account the purposes and principles of the Sentencing Act 2002, including holding Guest accountable for the harm done, providing for the interests of the victims, denouncing the conduct, and taking into account Guest’s rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Venning J considered the aggravating factors of Guest's offending, including the high alcohol reading, excessive speed, disregard for passengers' warnings, and the prolonged, persistent, and deliberate nature of the dangerous driving. The court also took into account mitigating factors such as Guest's age, remorse, and lack of previous convictions. The court concluded that the appropriate starting point for Guest’s sentence was eight years and nine months’ imprisonment, reduced to five years taking into account the totality of the circumstances and the guilty pleas.

The final orders of the court were that Guest be sentenced to five years’ imprisonment on the charge of manslaughter and three years’ imprisonment on each of the counts of driving, being a person in charge of a motor vehicle causing injury, with the terms running concurrently. Guest was also disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver’s licence for a period of four years. The court did not consider a minimum term of imprisonment necessary in Guest’s particular circumstances.

Orders