R v Moore - [2023] NZHC 3686

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTEPOTI ROHE

CRI-2022-012-1649

[2023] NZHC 3686

THE KING

v

LANCE COLIN ROBERT MOORE

Hearing: 11 December 2023

Appearances:

R D Smith for Crown

K H Cook for Defendant

Judgment:

11 December 2023

SENTENCING REMARKS OF EATON J

This judgment was delivered by me on …….. at ……… pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

R v MOORE [2023] NZHC 3686 [11 December 2023]

Introduction

[1] Lance Colin Robert Moore, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to a charge of manslaughter. Your guilty plea was entered promptly after the Crown agreed to accept that plea and to withdraw a charge of murder.

The offending

[2] In sentencing you this afternoon, I will first outline the facts of your offending and briefly summarise the impact your offending has had on Mr Buis’ family and loved ones. I appreciate, Mr Moore, that you will by now be fully familiar with the admitted facts of your offending. However, sentencing is a public function to be undertaken in an open court, and it is necessary for me to refer to the facts that you have admitted and upon which I must base your sentence. Those facts are set out in the agreed summary of facts, which is the document I am going to refer to. As will become apparent, there are matters referred to in this summary of facts that do not actually involve you, but they are included to provide context.

[3] You and Mr Buis were introduced through a mutual female associate. The two of you shared a common interest in the use and supply of methamphetamine. It seems clear you were both addicts, dealing in methamphetamine to fund your addictions. Users and suppliers of that drug often operate on a system of credit involving later repayment with money or an equivalent quantity of the drug. Operating within that system, Mr Buis was alleged to have owed money and drugs to several people in the drug fraternity.

[4] The female associate had purchased methamphetamine from you for an agreed price of $350, intending that she and Mr Buis would consume some of the drug and sell the remainder. The sale proceeds were to be used to pay you and to fund future drug purchases. You were not aware of her plans.

[5] The relationship between Mr Buis and the female associate deteriorated over the $350 debt owed to you. The summary of facts records that Mr Buis had taken both his and the female’s share of the methamphetamine, leaving her to pay the debt owed to you on her own.

[6] In response, she began threatening Mr Buis with violence unless he paid her the $350 or supplied her with methamphetamine. She then contacted others involved in the local drug community, persons who knew her and Mr Buis, spreading word that she was looking for him in relation to the debt. She…

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 Moore

Details

AGLC: R v Moore [2023] NZHC 3686
Case: [2023] NZHC 3686
Decision Date: 11 December 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Moore involved the sentencing of Lance Colin Robert Moore for manslaughter. Moore had pleaded guilty to the charge after the Crown agreed to withdraw a charge of murder. The court heard that Moore had deliberately run down a man, Sean Buis, in an attempt to confront him over a drug debt, resulting in Buis's death. The court considered various factors in determining the sentence, including the aggravating factors such as the use of a vehicle as a weapon, the victim's vulnerability, and Moore's failure to stop and render assistance. Mitigating factors included Moore's guilty plea, his expression of remorse, and his addiction to methamphetamine which was linked to his offending. The court decided on a sentence of four years and one month imprisonment, without imposing a minimum period of imprisonment, and disqualified Moore from driving for two years following his release. The court also ordered the forfeiture and destruction of the vehicle involved in the offence.

Orders