R v Heihei - [2017] NZHC 2243

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI TERENGA PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2016-029-829 [2017] NZHC 2243

THE QUEEN

v

JASON JAKE HEIHEI

Hearing: 15 September 2017

Appearances:

J P R Scott for Crown
K Ellis for Defendant

Sentence:

15 September 2017

SENTENCING REMARKS OF LANG J

R v HEIHEI [2017] NZHC 2243 [15 September 2017]

[1] Mr Heihei, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty to the murder of your younger brother, Cory. He was two years younger than you at the time of his death. I sentence you on the basis of a summary of facts that has been prepared for the purpose of your guilty plea. The facts stated in the summary are agreed by you to be correct.

Background

[2] The charge was laid as a result of an incident that occurred on the evening of

22 July 2016. You and Cory and others had been drinking at a private address and then a tavern during the course of the night. At about 1 am you went back to your parents’ address where, with your mother’s permission, you continued drinking alcohol on the condition that you would not make a lot of noise because there were young children in the house.

[3] The two of you carried on drinking, and then issues arose between you. This seems to have had its genesis in the fact that you went outside and started up a go- cart engine. This caused your mother to become angry because the noise could wake the children up. Cory told you to stop the engine. You and he then became involved in a verbal dispute that developed into a physical fight outside the house. A neighbour who looked over the fence saw the two of you rolling around and fighting on the lawn.

[4] You then went inside and there was some further discussion and bickering between you. Cory then went outside with your mother to smoke a cigarette on the porch. When they tried to come back into the house, you held the door closed and refused to let them come in until your mother swore at you and told you to open the door. She then entered and went to check on the children. Cory was at that stage in the kitchen area with you.

[5] You then began berating your mother about Cory being her favourite son. Cory took exception to this and confronted you in the kitchen. Initially the two of you bickered, but then matters developed into a fight. Others in the house told you to go outside and sort your differences out, but another fight occurred near the kitchen bench.

[6] Whilst the two of you were grappling with each other, you picked up a large knife with a blade that measured about 18 centimetres in length and two to three centimetres in width. You plunged the knife into Cory’s back on six occasions. The force used to inflict these…

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 Heihei

Details

AGLC: R v Heihei [2017] NZHC 2243
Case: [2017] NZHC 2243
Decision Date: 15 September 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of R v Heihei was heard, involving the defendant, Jason Jake Heihei, who pleaded guilty to the murder of his younger brother, Cory. The incident leading to Cory's death occurred on 22 July 2016, where the brothers got into a physical fight after drinking alcohol at their parents' house. During the altercation, Heihei picked up a large knife and stabbed Cory multiple times, causing fatal injuries. The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for Heihei, considering his previous convictions, the nature of the offence, and the impact on the victims. Given Heihei's prior convictions and the fact that he was subject to the "three strikes" legislation, the court found that imposing a life sentence without parole would be grossly disproportionate. Instead, the court sentenced Heihei to life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of ten years, and issued a second strike warning outlining the consequences of any future serious violence convictions.

The court considered various factors in reaching its decision, including the spontaneous nature of the murder, Heihei's criminal history, his age, and his guilty plea. The court also took into account the victim impact statements, which highlighted the profound loss experienced by Cory's family. While the victims' views were considered, the court concluded that imposing a life sentence without parole would be manifestly unjust, given the circumstances of the case and the offender.

Orders