R v Lowe Ca134/01

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard the appeal of Roy Eric Lowe, who was convicted and sentenced for multiple counts of sexual offending against boys aged between 8 and 16 years old, occurring between 1976 and 1978. Lowe pleaded guilty to three counts of indecent assault, one count of inducing an indecent act, and one count of attempted anal intercourse, receiving a sentence of four and a half years imprisonment on each charge. Lowe appealed the severity of his sentence, arguing it was manifestly excessive.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the sentence imposed by the High Court was within the proper sentencing range and whether any error in the indictment influenced the sentencing decision. Lowe's counsel argued that the delay in his guilty plea, attributable to negotiations with the Crown and pre-trial applications, warranted a greater discount. Additionally, Lowe’s counsel contended that the pre-sentence report's assessment of Lowe's low ability to change was flawed, and that the sentencing range should have been lower given the statutory changes reducing maximum penalties for certain offences.

The Court found that while the sentence was at the higher end, it was within the proper range, considering the significant aggravating factors. The Court dismissed the appeal, noting that the six-month discount for the late guilty plea was appropriate. The Court also noted that there was no evidence the error in the indictment influenced the sentencing decision. The Court amended the indictment to reflect the correct sections of the Crimes Act.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the sentence, dismissing the appeal and amending the indictment. The ruling highlighted the importance of considering aggravating factors and statutory changes in determining an appropriate sentence for sexual offences against children.