R v Maney - [2019] NZHC 2048

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CRI-2016-070-4452

[2019] NZHC 2048

THE QUEEN

v

JASON REX THOMAS MANEY

Counsel:
A J Pollett for Crown

A F Rickard-Simms for Defendant

Sentenced:

20 August 2019

Charge:

Causing grievous bodily harm with reckless disregard

Plea:

Guilty

SENTENCING NOTES OF BREWER J

Solicitors:
Pollett Legal (Tauranga) for Crown
Pacific Coast Law (Papamoa) for Defendant

R v MANEY [2019] NZHC 2048 [20 August 2019]

Introduction

[1] Mr Maney, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of causing grievous bodily harm to a person with reckless disregard for their safety.1 The maximum term of imprisonment is seven years. This is a strike two offence and so if you are sentenced to a finite term of imprisonment you will serve the whole of the sentence without being considered for parole. However, because of your history of violent offending, I also have to consider whether preventive detention is the appropriate sentence.

[2] Mr Maney, you have sat there and been sentenced many times before by many different Judges. You know that I cannot just look at you and tell you what the sentence is. Where preventive detention is an issue, sentencing can take some time. That is because although I am talking to you, I am also talking to quite a few other people – I am talking to the whanau in the public gallery, I am talking to your supporters, I am talking to the lawyers, and I am talking to other Judges. So, I am going to be a little time. Try to listen because this is probably the most important sentencing that you will receive.

Background

[3] The person you harmed is your mother. The summary of facts is brief. I will quote it:

On Sunday 21 August 2016 the defendant was at his home address on Kaitemako, Tauranga with the complainant.

For reasons unknown, the defendant became enraged with the complainant.

He hit her with his fist or unknown object with severe force, causing fractures to her right eye socket and fractures to both sides of her nose. The complainant also had serious bruising to the right side of her face as a result of the assault.

[4] I know that your mother, and you, have tried to minimise what happened. However, the injuries your mother received are not consistent with the minimisation. Dr Drummond’s opinion is that there were at least three blows and probably four. I will sentence you in accordance with the summary of facts.

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 188(2).

Finite sentence

[5] The first decision I have to make is the appropriate finite sentence for the charge. Both your lawyer and the Crown’s lawyer submit I should take a starting point of three to three-and-a-half years’ imprisonment.

[6] The aggravating features are that all the injuries you inflicted were to the victim’s head. The injuries were serious. Your mother was vulnerable due to the differences in your sizes…

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 Maney

Details

AGLC: R v Maney [2019] NZHC 2048
Case: [2019] NZHC 2048
Decision Date: 20 August 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Maney is a sentencing matter heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Tauranga Registry. The defendant, Jason Rex Thomas Maney, pleaded guilty to one charge of causing grievous bodily harm to a person with reckless disregard for their safety. The maximum term of imprisonment for this offence is seven years. This is considered a strike two offence, meaning that if sentenced to a finite term of imprisonment, the defendant will serve the whole of the sentence without being considered for parole. The court had to consider whether preventive detention was the appropriate sentence due to the defendant's history of violent offending.

The primary legal issue the court had to decide was whether to impose a finite term of imprisonment or a sentence of preventive detention. The court had to consider the defendant's criminal history, the seriousness of the harm caused by the offending, information indicating a tendency to commit serious offences in the future, and the extent to which the defendant had addressed the causes of their offending in the past.

The court found that the defendant's criminal history showed a pattern of serious violent offending. The defendant had a history of assaulting family members and others, with sentences of imprisonment ranging from one month to five years and five months. The court also found that the defendant had a high risk of reoffending with a high risk of harm to others, based on reports from health assessors and the defendant's Participation Assessment Committee (PAC) reports. The defendant had been offered various rehabilitative programmes by Corrections but had either been exited from the programmes or chosen not to continue with the courses.

Despite the defendant's history of violent offending, the court decided to impose a finite term of imprisonment instead of preventive detention. The court was influenced by the defendant's recent change in attitude, the availability of the Puwhakamua Programme, and the support offered by the defendant's whanau and supporters. The court believed that the defendant was ready to change and to join the programme, and that this would mitigate the risk the defendant would otherwise pose.

Final orders:
The defendant, Jason Rex Thomas Maney, is sentenced to three years and 10 months' imprisonment on the charge to which he pleaded guilty.

Orders