R v Lamositele-Brown - [2024] NZHC 118

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2022-092-1425

[2024] NZHC 118

THE KING

v

ANDREW LAMOSITELE-BROWN

Defendant

Hearing: 8 February 2024

Appearances:

CP Howard and SRDD Bicknell for the Crown VJ Feyen and MA Edgar for the Defendant

Judgment:

8 February 2024

SENTENCING NOTES OF FITZGERALD J

Solicitors: Kayes Fletcher Walker, Auckland

To:V Feyen, Auckland M Edgar, Auckland

R v LAMOSITELE-BROWN [2024] NZHC 118 [8 February 2024]

Introduction

[1] Mr Lamositele-Brown, please remain seated until I ask you to stand at the end of this sentencing.

[2] You appear today for sentencing following the jury’s unanimous verdicts of guilty on the charges of murder, 1 and unlawful possession of a firearm.2 You are also to be sentenced on drug charges which have been transferred to this Court from the District Court for the purposes of sentencing.3

[3] Before I go any further, I want to acknowledge those here in court today, firstly Mr Petau’s family members and supporters. I know this will be a very difficult time for you, and I acknowledge your presence in court today and extend to you the Court’s deepest sympathies. I also want to acknowledge the reading in court today of the victim impact statements. I will discuss these later in my sentencing remarks, but for now it is appropriate to acknowledge the courage it took to read them in court, and the great dignity with which you did so.

[4] It is also appropriate, Mr Lamositele-Brown, that I acknowledge the presence of any of your own family members and supporters here today. For your immediate family in particular, this is also a difficult time for them.

[5] Before turning to how I propose to approach your sentencing, I will first summarise the facts of your offending. You, and the lawyers and many of those here present today, will already be familiar with these, including from having sat through the evidence given at trial. However, sentencing is a public function and so it is important that the public is aware of the facts upon which I will be sentencing you.

1      Crimes Act 1961, ss 167 and 172. Maximum penalty life imprisonment.
2      Arms Act 1983, s 45. Maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment, or a fine of up to $4000, or both.
3      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(f) and (2)(a). Maximum penalty life imprisonment; and s 7(1)(a) and (2)(a). Maximum penalty 6 months imprisonment, or a fine of up to $1000 or both.

The facts

[6] At the time of your offending, you were living with your partner and your four children at an address in Flat Bush. You had arrived back in New Zealand some six months prior to this, having been deported from Australia under what is colloquially referred to as the 501 legislation.

[7] The victim, Mr Petau, was a friend of yours. You were a member of the Hells Angels motorcycle gang, and Mr Petau also had some…

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 Lamositele-Brown

Details

AGLC: R v Lamositele-Brown [2024] NZHC 118
Case: [2024] NZHC 118
Decision Date: 8 February 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of R v Lamositele-Brown was heard and decided on 8 February 2024. The defendant, Andrew Lamositele-Brown, was convicted by a jury of murder, unlawful possession of a firearm, and drug charges transferred from the District Court for sentencing purposes. The legal issues before the court involved determining an appropriate sentence for the defendant, particularly considering the mandatory life imprisonment requirement under the Sentencing Act 2002 unless a life sentence was manifestly unjust. The court had to decide the minimum period of imprisonment for the murder charge and the appropriate uplift for the additional drug and firearm charges.

The court rejected the defendant's claim that the shooting was accidental, finding that he intended to kill the victim at the moment he fired the shot. The court considered various aggravating factors such as the use of a weapon, the defendant’s intoxication, and the unprovoked nature of the attack against an unarmed victim. There were no significant mitigating factors related to the offence itself. The court compared the case with other similar cases and decided on a minimum period of imprisonment of 11 years and six months for the murder charge, considering the lack of premeditation. An uplift of 20 months was added for the drug and firearm charges, resulting in a total minimum period of imprisonment of 13 years and two months. After considering the defendant’s personal circumstances, including his expressions of remorse and prospects for rehabilitation, the court reduced the minimum period of imprisonment by six months to 12 years and eight months.

The final orders of the court were that Andrew Lamositele-Brown be sentenced to life imprisonment on the charge of murder, with a minimum period of imprisonment of 12 years and eight months. For the charge of possession of methamphetamine for supply, he was sentenced to 20 months’ imprisonment, and for unlawful possession of a firearm, he received a sentence of one year’s imprisonment. These sentences were to run concurrently with each other and with the life sentence. The defendant was convicted but discharged on the charge of possession of cocaine.

Orders