R v Inia - [2015] NZHC 2351

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

CRI-2014-019-003858 [2015] NZHC 2351

THE QUEEN

v

JAHMIN TAIORA TE HINGA INIA

Hearing: 6 May 2015

Appearances:

M J Robb for Crown
K W Burroughs for Prisoner

Judgment:

6 May 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF ANDREWS J

R v INIA [2015] NZHC 2351 [6 May 2015]

Charges

[1] Mr Inia, I gave you a sentence indication this morning and you have now asked to be arraigned on the three charges to which the sentence indication related. You have now entered pleas of guilty to each of those three charges. They are:

(a) Charge 7: a charge of burglary

(b) Charge 8: a charge of dishonestly using a document; and

(c) Charge 10: a charge of participating in an organised criminal group. [2] In the light of your guilty pleas, you are convicted on each of those charges.

[3] I record that you have accepted the draft summary of facts presented by the

Crown, and that you also accept the criminal and traffic history record dated 6th May

2015.

[4] Mr Burroughs has submitted to me today that you wish to proceed to be sentenced today and you have no objection to proceeding without a pre-sentence report. A pre-sentence report is usually before the Court before sentencing but the effect of your instructions to Mr Burroughs is that you waive the right to having a pre-sentence report considered.

[5] On behalf of the Crown, Mr Robb has indicated that the Crown has no objection to my proceeding to sentence you today.

[6] Accordingly, you will be sentenced in accordance with the sentencing indication and the sentences are as follows:

Relevant facts

[7] You are a member of a local Hamilton street gang known as the Westside Outlaws. The summary of facts recorded that text data from cellphones used by you and your co-offenders demonstrated your willingness to be involved in offending

such as theft, burglary, aggravated robbery and other dishonest offending, with the aim of acquiring income and assets. Your particular involvement was shown in discussing the organising of firearms before an aggravated robbery of the Frankton TAB on 12 April 2014, discussions after that robbery, and again after a further aggravated robbery of a bar.

[8] The charge of burglary you faced related to the burglary of the Te Runanga

Kirikiriora Adult Learning Centre in Frankton on 23 May 2014. The burglary was at

2.14 am. A safe containing cash, cheque books, bank cards, keys, trade cards, vouchers and other items to a total value of about $5,000 was taken. A few hours later one of the bank cards was used by you to withdraw $800 in cash.

Sentencing process

[9] The maximum available penalty on each of the charges of burglary and participation in an organised criminal group is ten years’ imprisonment. On the charge of dishonestly using a document the maximum available penalty is imprisonment for seven years.

[10] There is no tariff sentencing decision in respect of the charges…

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 Inia

Details

AGLC: R v Inia [2015] NZHC 2351
Case: [2015] NZHC 2351
Decision Date: 6 May 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the defendant, Jahmin Taiora Te Hinga Inia, was convicted on three charges: burglary, dishonestly using a document, and participating in an organised criminal group. The defendant pleaded guilty to all charges, leading to his conviction on each count. The court accepted the Crown's draft summary of facts and the criminal and traffic history record, waiving the requirement for a pre-sentence report.

The legal issues before the court involved determining the appropriate sentences for each of the charges considering the purposes and principles of sentencing, the seriousness of the offences, and the defendant's role in them. The burglary charge involved stealing from an adult learning centre, while the other charges were linked to his involvement in a street gang and an aggravated robbery. The court had to balance the defendant's criminal history, his level of involvement in the gang, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

The court sentenced the defendant to a total of 30 months imprisonment, to be served concurrently. The starting point for sentencing was set at 21 months for the burglary charge, with additional uplifts for the defendant's participation in the organised criminal group and his prior convictions. A discount for the defendant's early guilty pleas reduced the sentence by four months. Consequently, the defendant was sentenced to two years for burglary, six months for participating in an organised criminal group, and four months for using a document, all to be served concurrently.

Orders