R v Owens - [2017] NZHC 319

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

CRI-2016-012-000329 [2017] NZHC 319

THE QUEEN

v

DARYEN LESLIE JOHN OWENS

Hearing: 2 March 2017

Appearances:

R D Smith for Crown
J A Westgate for Defendant

Judgment:

2 March 2017

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

[1] Mr Owens you are here for sentence today having pleaded guilty to a charge of attempted murder.

Background

[2] The charge arose out of events which occurred early in the morning on

7 February 2016. You and your victim were known to each other. At the time of the incident she lived with your former wife, Ms Leanne Donaldson. At approximately
5.40 am in the morning she was woken by Ms Donaldson saying that there was someone at the door.

[3] When your victim opened the front door she found you standing there and you made a comment about her having ruined your life and that you were going to ruin hers. You grabbed her by the throat, pushed her into a nearby wall and then
head butted her in the face. You then stabbed her in the shoulder with a stainless

R v OWENS [2017] NZHC 319 [2 March 2017]

steel kitchen knife that you had brought with you. While you held her by the throat you stabbed her multiple times before she got away to the kitchen area. You followed her and stabbed her multiple times in the back.

[4] In all she was stabbed 14 times, four times in the back and 10 times in the front of her body including six stab wounds to her breasts.

[5] Some of the more serious injuries suffered by her included:

(a) one deep wound causing a three centimetres laceration to the liver and a puncture to the lung;

(b)one wound below her diaphragm which was deep enough to cause penetration into her abdomen resulting in the inside lining of her stomach protruding from her skin;

(c) a deep wound to the left lower thoracic spine region, penetrating the muscles at the left edge of her spine; and

(d)a wound to the right side of the thoracic spine penetrating deep enough to reach her thoracic vertebrae.

[6] Before you left the house you told Ms Donaldson “don’t you ring them” and that would appear to be a reference to calling police and emergency services. However, at 5.42 am an ambulance was called and the victim was taken to Dunedin Public Hospital where she underwent surgery. She remained in hospital for seven days due to the nature of her injuries. Medical staff at the hospital advised police that she was lucky to be alive due to the number and nature of the stab wounds in her body. While your victim was originally reluctant to make a statement out of a justifiable fear for her life she later advised that it was you who stabbed her and that is confirmed by other forensic and circumstantial evidence.

Impact on victim

[7] In terms of the impact on the…

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 Owens

Details

AGLC: R v Owens [2017] NZHC 319
Case: [2017] NZHC 319
Decision Date: 2 March 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Owens involved a defendant who pleaded guilty to a charge of attempted murder. The events leading to the charge occurred on 7 February 2016, when the defendant attacked the victim, who lived with his former wife, with a knife. The attack was premeditated and involved extreme violence, resulting in the victim suffering multiple stab wounds. The attack had severe physical and emotional consequences for the victim. The legal issues for the court to decide included the starting point for the sentence, the relevance of prior convictions, and the appropriate discount for the guilty plea. The court considered the severity of the attack, the defendant's criminal history, and the benefits of the guilty plea in determining the sentence. The court ultimately decided on a starting point of 11 and a half years, reduced by 13 per cent for the guilty plea, resulting in a sentence of 10 years with a minimum period of imprisonment of five years.

Orders