R v Hapi - [2025] NZHC 1160

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE PAPAIOEA ROHE

CRI-2024-054-2494

[2025] NZHC 1160

THE KING

v

JOSHUA WHAKETAKI HAPI

Hearing: 13 May 2025

Counsel:

B D Vanderkolk and G M Stone for Crown L Scott for Defendant

Sentence:

13 May 2025

SENTENCING NOTES OF ISAC J

[1] I want to begin again by acknowledging James. He was only 49 years old when he passed away. He was a tuakana; a man of great mana; a good man who loved his whānau and cared for them. His family say he was their pou; a man who lived humbly, gave selflessly and deserved more.

[2] Thank you to those who spoke today. You spoke with great dignity and I could see how difficult it was for you. I am grateful for your words. I think I have a better understanding of the man who James was.

R v HAPI [2025] NZHC 1160 [13 May 2025]

[3] Mr Hapi, you appear here for sentence having pleaded guilty to two charges of driving with excess blood alcohol causing injury,1 and one charge of driving with excess blood alcohol causing death.2

The offending

[4] In 2023 you were charged with unrelated offending. You were released on bail and one of the conditions was that you were not to consume alcohol. Despite this, on the 23rd of May 2024, only 16 days before the offending for which you appear today for sentence, you were stopped by Police while driving. You were found with a breath alcohol level of 391 micrograms per litre of breath. That’s only nine micrograms below the legal limit for a criminal charge.

[5] On 8 June, that year, 2024 you drove to a housewarming party in Palmerston North arriving in the mid-afternoon You consumed alcohol to the extent that partygoers observed you as being significantly affected. This was a further breach of your bail conditions.

[6] Six hours after your arrival at the party, at about 9.30pm, you got into your car and left the address, travelling towards Ashurst. On a 500 metre stretch you drove at speeds between 142 and 157 km/h. This area was three-and-a-half kilometres from the crash site, and Police estimate that your average speed over this distance was 140 km/h. The area in question was marked as a 100 km/h zone.

[7] While driving you were receiving calls and text messages some of which were encouraging you to return to the party. At some point you made a U-turn to travel back to Palmerston North. While stationary during the turn you switched your phone to silent.

[8] Mr Haddon was driving a Holden Rodeo ute in an easterly direction towards Palmerston North. He was driving to work.

1 Land Transport Act 1998, ss 61(1)(b) and 61(3AA).
2 Land Transport Act, ss 61(1)(b) and 61(3).

[9] About 18 seconds after you turned your phone to silent you collided into the rear of Mr Haddon’s vehicle. He was travelling…

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 Hapi

Details

AGLC: R v Hapi [2025] NZHC 1160
Case: [2025] NZHC 1160
Decision Date: 13 May 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Isac J sentenced Joshua Whakataki Hapi to three years' imprisonment for driving with excess blood alcohol causing death and three months' imprisonment for two charges of driving with excess blood alcohol causing injury. The case involved Hapi's driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis, resulting in the death of James Haddon and injuries to two other individuals. The court considered various mitigating factors, including Hapi's early guilty plea, youth, mental health issues, and rehabilitative prospects. Despite these factors, the court imposed a five-year disqualification from driving and ordered Hapi to pay reparation to the victims' families.

The primary legal issues addressed by the court involved determining an appropriate starting point for sentencing, considering both aggravating and mitigating factors, and ensuring the sentence reflected the gravity of Hapi's actions. The court began with a starting point of five years' imprisonment, considering Hapi's high level of intoxication, excessive speed, and the significant impact of his actions. Mitigating factors such as his early guilty plea, youth, and efforts to address his addiction and mental health issues resulted in various reductions to the starting point. Ultimately, the court imposed a three-year imprisonment sentence, a five-year disqualification from driving, and ordered Hapi to pay reparation to the victims' families.

Orders