R v Huriwaka - [2023] NZHC 112

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2020-092-2562

[2023] NZHC 112

THE KING

V

TIMOTHY KAHURANGI HURIWAKA

Hearing: 3 February 2023

Counsel:

D B Stevens & C E Best for Crown S D Cassidy for Defendant

Sentence:

3 February 2023

SENTENCE OF PAUL DAVISON J

Solicitors:
Kayes Fletcher Walker, Auckland

R v HURIWAKA [2023] NZHC 112 [3 February 2023]

Introduction

[1] Timothy Huriwaka, you appear before the Court today to be sentenced having been convicted on one charge of the manslaughter1of Joshua Ikitogia, and one charge of wounding Joseph Ngamu with intent to cause him grievous bodily harm.2

[2] Both charges arise from the events occurring in Bairds Road, Ōtara on 28 February 2020.

[3] Mr Huriwaka, although the maximum penalty for manslaughter is life imprisonment, at the conclusion of this sentencing hearing today I shall impose a determinate sentence for a fixed period which will take account of both of the charges which you appear for sentence on this morning.

Background

[4]I will commence with a summary of your offending.

[5] On 10 February 2019, Bruce Ngamu made a formal statement to police in which he made a complaint about you. You were subsequently interviewed by the Police in relation to his allegations and you denied them. A week later you were remanded in custody on unrelated matters.

[6]On 18 February 2020 you were released from prison.

[7] During the afternoon or evening of 28 February 2020, you left your home address in a Honda vehicle which you had been given the use of, and went and picked up HW. Shortly before 8pm, you moved on and picked up Michael Robinson.

[8] Sometime after 8pm, you drove with Mr W and Mr Robinson to a residential property in Bairds Road Otara. There you spoke to Bruce Ngamu and in the course of your conversation you brought up the subject of his February 2019 complaint about

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 66(2), 171 and 176. Maximum penalty life imprisonment.
2 Sections 66(2) and 188(1). Maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.

you to the Police. Having spoken to Mr Ngamu you and your two associates, Mr Robinson and Mr W, departed in the Honda.

[9] You then drove with Mr W and Mr Robinson to Manurewa where you picked up DM who you needed as a driver that night in order to carry out what you were proposing to do. From there you drove to an address in Rosella Road where Mr Robinson went into the house and returned in possession of a firearm and with ammunition. Once back inside your vehicle, Mr Robinson proceeded to load the firearm with the ammunition. Shortly after you had driven away from the Rosella Road address you pulled over, and instructed Mr M to take over as the driver. You and Mr Robinson were then in the back seat of the vehicle and Mr W moved into the front passenger seat. You instructed Mr…

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 Huriwaka

Details

AGLC: R v Huriwaka [2023] NZHC 112
Case: [2023] NZHC 112
Decision Date: 3 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Timothy Kahurangi Huriwaka was sentenced for the manslaughter of Joshua Ikitogia and the wounding of Joseph Ngamu with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, both stemming from an incident in Ōtara on 28 February 2020. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence that reflected the purposes and principles of sentencing as outlined in the Sentencing Act 2002. The legal issues included determining an appropriate starting point for the sentence, considering the aggravating and mitigating factors of the offending, and ensuring consistency with the sentence imposed on the co-offender, Mr Robinson. The court found that the offending involved serious violence, premeditation, and an invasion of a residential property, which were significant aggravating features. There were no mitigating features suggested by the defence. The court considered the starting point for manslaughter to be seven years, with an uplift to ten years to account for the wounding charge. Adjustments were made for personal aggravating and mitigating factors, resulting in a final sentence of seven years and eight months for each charge, to be served concurrently, with a minimum period of imprisonment of five years.

Orders