R v Hyde - [2013] NZHC 2586

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI 2012-091-524
[2013] NZHC 2586

THE QUEEN

v

JORDAN LEE HYDE

Hearing:	4 October 2013
Counsel:	P K Feltham for Crown P Surridge for Accused
Sentence:	4 October 2013

SENTENCE OF RONALD YOUNG J

[1] Mr Hyde you are for sentence having pleaded guilty to manslaughter; driving under the influence of drink causing injury; and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle. You have previously been given a sentence indication which you have accepted.

[2] On the evening of 13 February 2012 you were at a house in Paekakariki. You were drinking wine and smoking cannabis. You behaved aggressively at that house and you were asked to leave by the occupants. You then walked down the road and there was a station wagon parked on a front lawn. The vehicle was unlocked and the keys were in the ignition. You took the car and drove away.

R v HYDE [2013] NZHC 2586 [4 October 2013]

[3] You began driving through the streets of Paekakariki. You drove down Wellington Road and then collided with a traffic island on Beach Road. As a result of the collision both wheels on the ride hand side of your vehicle deflated. You did not have your headlights on although it was by this stage about ten o’clock in the evening.

[4] You then drove onto State Highway One and headed North. About 500 metres north of Paekakariki when you crossed the centre line of the road. You were travelling about 15 to 20 kilometres an hour over the speed limit at that time.

[5] Travelling south in another car were Mr Tarr and Ms Reweti. You collided head on with their car. Ms Reweti was killed instantly by the impact. Mr Tarr was trapped in his vehicle. He suffered bruising to his chest, a fractured sternum, fractures to his right ribs, a fractured right femur and other fractures including multiple fractures of his right foot and a serious cut to his tongue. He was taken to hospital and admitted.

[6] You should not have been driving at all. You were driving in breach of your licence and you were driving with an excess breath alcohol level of 194 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood, almost two and a half times the maximum permitted. Cannabis was also found in your blood.

[7] You have previous convictions for driving with excess breath alcohol and use of cannabis. In 2006 you were convicted of driving with excess breath alcohol and you were again convicted similarly in 2007. You have other offences but they are mostly nuisance offending but do include unlawfully interfering with vehicles.

[8] I have read the probation report. At 22 years of age it notes you have previous convictions but you have never previously been imprisoned. But you have had sentences of supervision designed to help and support you. The probation report notes that you are at high risk of reoffending given the pattern and frequency…

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 Hyde

Details

AGLC: R v Hyde [2013] NZHC 2586
Case: [2013] NZHC 2586
Decision Date: 4 October 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Hyde involved the defendant, Jordan Lee Hyde, who was sentenced for his guilty plea to manslaughter, driving under the influence causing injury, and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle. The incident occurred on 13 February 2012, when Hyde unlawfully took a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and cannabis, leading to a collision with another car on State Highway One, which resulted in the death of Ms Reweti and serious injuries to Mr Tarr. The court had to decide on the appropriate sentence considering Hyde's previous convictions, mental health issues, and the circumstances of the offence.

The central legal issues addressed by the court were the appropriate starting point for sentencing, the influence of Hyde's mental health on his offending, and the extent of reduction for his guilty plea. The Crown argued for a significant sentence due to the dangerous nature of the driving, the unlawful taking of the vehicle, and the death and injuries caused. The defence emphasised Hyde's mental health issues and his young age at the time of the offence, requesting a substantial reduction in sentence. The court balanced these factors, noting the serious consequences of the offence and the mitigating effects of Hyde's mental health condition and guilty plea.

The court found that the appropriate starting point for the sentence was six years and nine months' imprisonment, considering the dangerous driving, the unlawful taking of the vehicle, and the resulting death and injuries. The court increased the sentence by three months for the fact that Hyde was on bail at the time of the offence but reduced the sentence by nine months due to his mental vulnerability, which, while not the primary cause of the offending, did impact his responsibility and made imprisonment more challenging for him. The court further reduced the sentence by 25 per cent due to Hyde's guilty plea, resulting in a final sentence of four years and eight months' imprisonment for manslaughter, six months for unlawfully taking a motor vehicle, and 18 months for driving under the influence causing injury, all to run concurrently. Hyde was also disqualified from driving for ten years.

The court's final orders included a sentence of four years and eight months' imprisonment for manslaughter, six months for unlawfully taking a motor vehicle, and 18 months for driving under the influence causing injury, all to run concurrently, along with a ten-year disqualification from driving. This decision reflects the seriousness of the offence, the mitigating factors of Hyde's mental health issues, and the acceptance of responsibility shown through his guilty plea.

Orders