R v Kingi - [2021] NZHC 140

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NAPIER REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA AHURIRI ROHE

CRI-2020-020-001335

[2021] NZHC 140

THE QUEEN

v

STEVEN MATTHEW KINGI JESSEE JAMES BURNS STEWART HUBBARD

Hearing: 11 February 2021

Appearances:

C R Walker for the Crown M J Phelps for Mr Kingi

C Robertson (for L P F Lafferty) for Mr Burns E J Forster for Mr Hubbard

Judgment:

11 February 2021

SENTENCING OF COOKE J

[1] Steven Kingi, Jessee Burns and Stewart Hubbard you appear today for sentencing on the charge of manslaughter of Mr Jermaine Ramos and the charge of aggravated robbery, to which you have pled guilty.

[2] In explaining the sentence I intend to impose for each of you I will first consider the general starting point for the period of imprisonment for the offending given the role you each played. I will then address circumstances personal to you that may affect your individual sentences.

R v KINGI & ORS [2021] NZHC 140 [11 February 2021]

The facts

[3]I first deal with the facts of the offending.

[4] On 30 March 2019 Mr Ramos arranged to meet an associate of yours, Ms Julia McRae. He drove to Hastings where he collected Ms McRae and took her to a motel where he agreed to pay for sexual services and requested methamphetamine. The following morning Ms McRae left the motel by a taxi following an argument. She felt disrespected at a request for another sex worker to participate, and because she had not received payment for her services in full. Mr Ramos said he would pay the outstanding balance online.

[5] When Ms McRae did not receive payment online, she contacted you Mr Kingi, to tell you what happened. When she did not receive payment the following day either, she contacted you again to discuss how to obtain payment. You suggested that Ms McRae lure Mr Ramos back to her address.

[6] That afternoon Mr Kingi you contacted Mr Burns advising him of a plan to rob someone. Mr Burns you then contacted you Mr Hubbard. You all met with Ms McRae to discuss how to get Mr Ramos inside her address so you could then come inside and obtain the money owed. Ms McRae told you she did not want there to be violence.

[7]Mr Ramos arrived at Ms McRae’s address in the evening after withdrawing

$640. He was invited inside by Ms McRae. She went into a bedroom to check on her young child, which is when the three of you entered the address, assaulted him, took his cash and fled.

[8] Ms McRae describes the offending from what she heard behind a closed, blocked door. One of you demanded money and told Mr Ramos to shut up. Mr Ramos was heard saying “Please no, stop, stop”. She then heard what she described as “banging”, “crashing”, “thumping” and “smashing”. It then went quiet. When Ms McRae entered when it seemed safe, she saw Mr Ramos lying on the lounge…

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 Kingi

Details

AGLC: R v Kingi [2021] NZHC 140
Case: [2021] NZHC 140
Decision Date: 11 February 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of R v Kingi involved three defendants charged with the manslaughter of Mr Jermaine Ramos and aggravated robbery. The defendants, Steven Kingi, Jessee Burns, and Stewart Hubbard, had pleaded guilty to the charges. The court needed to determine the appropriate sentences for each defendant, taking into account the circumstances of the offending, the personal circumstances of the defendants, and the relevant legal principles.

The primary legal issue was the determination of the appropriate starting point for the sentence of imprisonment, considering the defendants' roles and the nature of the offence. The court had to balance the seriousness of the assault and the premeditation involved, alongside the systemic cultural, social, and economic factors that contributed to the offending. The court also had to consider the discounts for guilty pleas and the cultural reports provided under s 27.

The court found that the assault was serious but did not involve weapons and would not have been expected to cause death without the contributing factors. The involvement of three defendants and the premeditation of the aggravated robbery made the case more serious. Given the comparable Court of Appeal cases, the court set a starting point between six years six months and seven years. Steven Kingi, as the organiser, received a starting point of seven years, while Jessee Burns and Stewart Hubbard received a starting point of six years six months each.

After applying the discounts for guilty pleas and cultural factors, the total discount for each defendant was approximately 40 per cent. The court did not impose a minimum period of imprisonment, as the principles of accountability, denunciation, deterrence, and protection had already been addressed in the sentence. The defendants were also sentenced to three years' imprisonment for the charge of aggravated robbery, to be served concurrently with the manslaughter sentences.

The final orders were that Steven Kingi was sentenced to four years two months' imprisonment for manslaughter and three years concurrently for aggravated robbery, resulting in an overall sentence of four years two months. Jessee Burns was sentenced to four years for manslaughter and three years concurrently for aggravated robbery, resulting in an overall sentence of four years, with unpaid Court fines remitted. Stewart Hubbard was sentenced to three years 10 months for manslaughter and three years concurrently for aggravated robbery, resulting in an overall sentence of three years 10 months, with unpaid Court fines also remitted.

Orders