R v Ngarongo - [2023] NZHC 2442

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2022-009-417

[2023] NZHC 2442

THE KING

v

JESSIE JAMES NGARONGO HEBER KURE WATSON

Hearing: 1 September 2023

Appearances:

L Fiennes for Crown

O K Jarvis for Defendant Mr Ngarongo A J McKenzie for Defendant Mr Watson

Judgment:

1 September 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

[1] Mr Ngarongo and Mr Watson, you are both here for sentence today on a charge of aggravated robbery. Mr Ngarongo, you pleaded guilty on 7 July 2023 and Mr Watson, you were found guilty on 12 July 2023 following a jury trial.

[2] I will begin by setting out the facts of the offending which are common to both of you. I will then discuss the sentence that each of you will receive, taking into account your role in the offending and any aggravating or mitigating factors that are personal to you.

R v NGARONGO [2023] NZHC 2442 [1 September 2023]

The facts of the offending

[3] In the early afternoon of 17 January 2022, the two of you along with three others, went to an address at Elizabeth Street in Riccarton where the three victims were present. Mr Ngarongo and Mr Watson, you entered the property along with your two co-defendants, Mr Wiringi and Mr Jager. You approached the two male victims who were sitting on the driveway repairing a trailer. You repeatedly kicked, punched and struck the two victims with blunt objects while they remained on the ground.

[4] You then took the two male victims to a sleepout at the rear of the address and held them there. One of the victims had his head forced between the cushions of a couch and was instructed not to move. He was then repeatedly punched and kicked, and then stabbed with a sharp implement causing five small puncture wounds in his leg. A curtain was wrapped around the second victim, including covering his head. While wrapped in the curtain, the second victim was repeatedly kicked and punched. He was also stabbed with a sharp implement in his right hip causing two small puncture wounds.

[5] The third victim, a female, was in the sleepout which you forced the male victims into. She was told not to call the police and then thrown on to a bed and asked for her address. She was told if she did not say where she lived, she would be shot. She was then also told that you would be coming around to visit her later in the day. The victims were then left in the sleepout while the two of you, with your two co-defendants, ransacked the rest of the address.

[6] At this point, a further co-defendant, Ms Heald-Harris, reversed a vehicle into the driveway so that it could be filled with stolen property. The two of you, along with the other defendants took various items of personal property from the address and loaded them into the vehicle which…

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 Ngarongo

Details

AGLC: R v Ngarongo [2023] NZHC 2442
Case: [2023] NZHC 2442
Decision Date: 1 September 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Ngarongo and Watson pertains to a charge of aggravated robbery involving both defendants. Mr Ngarongo pleaded guilty, while Mr Watson was found guilty following a jury trial. The High Court of New Zealand at Christchurch, presided over by Justice Dunningham, delivered the judgment on the same day as the hearing, 1 September 2023. The primary legal issue was determining the appropriate sentence for both defendants, taking into account the nature and circumstances of the offence, their roles, and any personal mitigating or aggravating factors.

The court began by outlining the facts of the offence, which involved a home invasion, use of weapons, significant injuries inflicted on the victims, and the presence of multiple offenders. The court identified several aggravating factors, including the home invasion, use of weapons, violence, and the involvement of a gang element. However, the court noted that the weapons used were not as severe as knives or firearms. The court also acknowledged the presence of mitigating factors, such as the defendants' early exposure to violence, methamphetamine addiction, and efforts to rehabilitate while on bail.

After considering the aggravating and mitigating factors, the court determined a starting point of seven years' imprisonment for both defendants, in line with the sentences of their co-offenders. The court then made adjustments to the sentence based on personal factors. For Mr Ngarongo, the court imposed a six-month uplift due to his prior convictions for aggravated robbery and wounding with intent, but granted discounts for his guilty plea, participation in restorative justice, and the time spent on electronic monitoring (EM) bail. The final sentence for Mr Ngarongo was five years' imprisonment. For Mr Watson, the court decided against an uplift for his prior convictions, but granted a 20% discount for his background factors and addiction issues, resulting in a sentence of five years and seven months' imprisonment.

In summary, the court sentenced Mr Ngarongo to five years' imprisonment and Mr Watson to five years and seven months' imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness of the offence, the defendants' roles, and the personal factors considered in mitigation.

Orders