R v Matara - [2017] NZHC 2198

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2016-092-004659 [2017] NZHC 2198

THE QUEEN

v

BILLY MATARA

Appearances:
C D Piho for Crown

R M Mansfield for Prisoner

Date:

11 September 2017

SENTENCING NOTES OF COURTNEY J

R v MATARA [2017] NZHC 2198 [11 September 2017]

Introduction

[1] Billy Matara, you are for sentence today for the attempted murder of Hemi Hingaia, having been found guilty on that charge earlier this year. The maximum penalty for this offence is 14 years’ imprisonment.1

[2] I can describe the circumstances of the offending quite briefly In May 2016 you had been living in a boarding house in Mangere East for about two months. Mr Hingaia was a resident at the same boarding house. You were not particularly close but nor had there been any trouble between you. In the early hours of 7 May 2016 you went into Mr Hingaia’s room and woke him. You asked him to come outside onto the deck for a smoke. Mr Hingaia did notice that you had a pump-action shotgun with you. He described thinking that there was something a bit out of place but he said nothing. The two of you sat on the deck and talked for a little bit. There was no argument.

[3] After a time Mr Hingaia went inside to the kitchen. You must have followed shortly afterwards because when he turned around he saw you standing just outside the kitchen door about four metres away. You were pointing a gun at him. You did not say anything but you shot him in the torso and a few seconds later you hot him again. Then you then ran from the house. Others came to Mr Hingaia’s aid.

[4] He was very badly injured. He was fortunate not to have been killed and even a year on, when he gave his evidence at trial, it was obvious that he was still suffering from the consequences of his injuries. In his victim impact statement he explained that he has had to live with a colostomy bag since the incident – reversal surgery was unsuccessful and he cannot undergo another attempt at surgery until the end of this year. He has lost a lot of independence. He has ongoing pain. He still feels the emotional impact of this traumatic event.

[5] So now I turn to sentence on the basis of these facts. In doing so I keep in mind the purposes identified in the Sentencing Act and apply the principles set out in
that Act. The main objectives in sentencing in a case like this is denunciation for the

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 173

offending, deterrence to stop you and others offending in this way and hold you accountable to protect the community.2 The relevant principles that I need to take into account are the gravity of the offending, taking into account the seriousness of this offence in comparison with other kinds…

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 Matara

Details

AGLC: R v Matara [2017] NZHC 2198
Case: [2017] NZHC 2198
Decision Date: 11 September 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Matara, the defendant, Billy Matara, was sentenced for the attempted murder of Hemi Hingaia. Matara had been found guilty of the charge earlier in the year, with the maximum penalty being 14 years' imprisonment. The incident occurred in May 2016, when Matara, living in the same boarding house as Hingaia, invited Hingaia outside for a smoke, armed with a pump-action shotgun. Matara shot Hingaia twice in the torso, leaving him severely injured and with ongoing health and emotional consequences. The legal issues in this case involved determining the appropriate starting point for Matara's sentence, taking into account factors such as premeditation, the unprovoked nature of the attack, the use of a deadly weapon, and the extreme level of violence. Additionally, the court needed to consider Matara's personal factors, including his extensive criminal history and mental health issues.

The court considered the Crown's argument for a starting point of 11 years, while Matara's counsel argued for a starting point of ten years. The court found that while there was some premeditation, it was not specifically directed towards Hingaia, and Matara's mental state at the time should be taken into account. The court also considered the unprovoked nature of the attack, the use of a deadly weapon, and the extreme level of violence, determining that the appropriate starting point was ten years. The court imposed a two-month uplift for Matara's previous aggravated robbery conviction, resulting in a total sentence of ten years and two months without parole or early release.

In summary, the court found Matara guilty of attempted murder and sentenced him to ten years and two months in prison, without the possibility of parole or early release. The court acknowledged the difficult circumstances of Matara's life, but emphasized the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community.

Orders