R v Heenan - [2014] NZHC 553

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

CRI-2009-063-003966 [2014] NZHC 553

THE QUEEN

v

CHRISTOPHER ALLAN HEENAN

Hearing: 20 March 2014

Counsel:

AJ Gordon and N Tahana for the Crown
S Lance and BJ Foote for the Defendant

Judgment:

20 March 2014

SENTENCING NOTES OF ASHER J

Solicitors/Counsel:
Crown Solicitor, Rotorua.
S Lance, Auckland.
O’Sullivan Clemens, Rotorua.

R v HEENAN [2014] NZHC 553 [20 March 2014]

[1] Mr Heenan, you have been found guilty by a jury of the murder of Raukawa

Newton. It is now my task to sentence you.

[2] You and Mr Newton had become friends. On 11 October 2007 he came to your home. It was a meeting that commenced at least in friendship. However, at the end of the evening Mr Newton was dead as a consequence of a stab wound administered by you.

[3] We do not know the exact sequence of events through that evening. However, the Crown put their theory of the case as to what happened based largely on what you had said to AB to the jury, and in my view the jury have accepted that account, as do I.

[4] Through the evening you both became very drunk. At some stage Mr Newton turned to the spiritual side of his life and began to invoke the Maori gods. For some reason this incensed you. It can only be assumed you fell into a violent rage. Whatever it was that took over, it prompted you to take hold of a knife and stab Mr Newton. I consider you did stab him in the way you outlined to AB by holding him and reaching around from his back and stabbing him in a downward movement in the top part of his left chest. The knife went in at an angle and cut through his aorta causing Mr Newton to die within a very short time. The wound was a wide one showing notching and in my view you are likely to have held it inside him with all your strength while he struggled against you.

[5] Because of the terrible nature of the injury Mr Newton suffered he would have lost consciousness within seconds, and he collapsed on the floor. You then stabbed yourself 11 or 12 times in the stomach having taken off your shirt to make it look as if Mr Newton had attacked you. You then went to your neighbour knowing that in due course the Police would arrive, as they did.

[6] You claimed to have little or no memory of events and so the Police and the Crown have had to reconstruct what happened on the basis of the physical evidence and on the basis of what you later said to others.

[7] There has been an earlier trial where a verdict of guilty was later set aside by the Court of Appeal. After that earlier verdict you were sentenced by Brewer J on
3 March 2011 to life imprisonment with a 10 year…

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 Heenan

Details

AGLC: R v Heenan [2014] NZHC 553
Case: [2014] NZHC 553
Decision Date: 20 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Rotorua Registry, the case of R v Heenan involved the sentencing of Christopher Allan Heenan, who had been found guilty of the murder of Raukawa Newton. The hearing took place on 20 March 2014, with counsel AJ Gordon and N Tahana representing the Crown, and S Lance and BJ Foote representing the defendant. The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate sentence for Heenan, given his conviction for murder under the Sentencing Act 2002. The court was required to determine a sentence of imprisonment for life, including a minimum term, considering the nature of the crime and the impact on the victim’s family.

The court proceeded to sentence Heenan to imprisonment for life with a minimum term of 10 years, a decision that aligned with the Sentencing Act's requirements for murder convictions. The judge acknowledged the significant suffering and loss experienced by the victims' families, as illustrated in the victim impact statements. These statements highlighted Raukawa Newton's role as a beloved and respected figure, underscoring the profound impact of his death. The court emphasized that the sentence was mandated by law and was not intended to compensate for the loss but to hold Heenan accountable and to protect the community.

The sentencing process took into account the previous sentence set aside by the Court of Appeal, and the court adopted the same sentence as the one previously imposed by Brewer J. This decision was supported by both the Crown and the defence, aiming for immediate closure for all parties involved. The court reiterated that the sentence of life imprisonment would mean Heenan would remain in custody unless the Parole Board determined otherwise, and any further offending would result in his immediate return to custody. The court's decision reflected a balanced consideration of legal requirements and the gravity of the crime.

Orders