R v Poata - [2014] NZHC 1028

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

CRI 2013-019-000931 [2014] NZHC 1028

THE QUEEN

v

MALCOLM FRASER POATA

Hearing: 16 May 2014

Appearances:

R G Douch for the Crown
D L Bates for the Defendant

Judgment:

16 May 2014

SENTENCING NOTES OF GILBERT J

R v POATA [2014] NZHC 1028 [16 May 2014]

Introduction

[1] Mr Poata, you appear for sentence today having been found guilty by a jury of manslaughter. The maximum sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment.

Facts

[2] On the night of 16/17 February 2013, you and a number of others were celebrating the birthday of a prominent member of the Taupiri Motorcycle Club, which was taking place on a property owned by the club. You are, or were, a patched member of that club.

[3] In the early hours of the morning the victim, Mr Moana, a club prospect, got into a dispute with Mr Wade, a fellow club prospect. Mr Wade, who is slightly built, punched Mr Moana a couple of times but did not knock him to the ground. At this point you came over and punched Mr Moana repeatedly on the head and chest. After knocking him to the ground, you picked him up so that he was in a half-standing position before punching him again. You knocked Mr Moana back down to the ground. You left him there and made no attempt to assist him.

[4] Mr Moana died as a result of the injuries he sustained. These included a 5-6 centimetre bilateral haematoma, a 7 by 5 centimetre bruise on the left side of the chest, an 8 by 1 centimetre bruise on his back between his shoulder blades, deep bruising in the mid to upper back, and fractures of the T3 and T6 vertebrae. The pathologist’s evidence was that the fractures suffered by Mr Moana are those typically caused by car accidents, motor cycle accidents or where people have fallen from a great height. He said that a very significant amount of force is required to cause these fractures. The pathologist described the bruising to the left side of Mr Moana’s chest as “very, very heavy”.

[5] It is implicit in the jury’s verdict, and it is also my conclusion having heard the evidence, that you were responsible for inflicting the majority of these injuries which required multiple punches and resulted in Mr Moana being knocked to the ground twice. You continued to punch him even after you had initially knocked him down. You lifted him off the ground to do so. There can be no doubt that in

punching Mr Moana repeatedly, as you did, you intended to cause him really serious injury.

[6] I have read and considered the heart-rending victim impact statements prepared by the members of Mr Moana’s family. You have heard these read to the Court this morning. Mr Moana is described as a man who, despite all the difficulties he faced in life, cared deeply about his family and was always kind…

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 Poata

Details

AGLC: R v Poata [2014] NZHC 1028
Case: [2014] NZHC 1028
Decision Date: 16 May 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of The Queen v Malcolm Fraser Poata (2014) involved the sentencing of the defendant, Mr Poata, who had been found guilty of manslaughter by a jury. The maximum penalty for manslaughter is life imprisonment. On the night in question, Mr Poata and others were at a birthday celebration for a member of the Taupiri Motorcycle Club. A dispute arose between two club prospects, Mr Wade and Mr Moana, which escalated when Mr Poata intervened and punched Mr Moana repeatedly, causing fatal injuries. The court considered the severity of the injuries inflicted, the high level of violence, the nature of the attack, and the fact that Mr Poata was not the sole attacker, among other factors, in determining the appropriate sentence.

The legal issues the court needed to address included establishing the appropriate starting point for sentencing based on similar cases and guideline judgments, determining any aggravating or mitigating personal factors, and deciding on an appropriate minimum period of imprisonment if warranted. The court commenced by setting a starting point of seven years' imprisonment based on the guidelines for serious violence and other similar cases of manslaughter. Personal factors such as Mr Poata's history of violent offending and acceptance of responsibility for his actions were also considered. The court applied an uplift of 12 months for the aggravating factors and a discount of five per cent for genuine expressions of remorse, while also considering the time spent on restrictive bail conditions.

After weighing all the factors, the court sentenced Mr Poata to seven years and two months' imprisonment with a minimum period of imprisonment set at three years and seven months. This decision was based on the need to hold Mr Poata accountable for the harm caused, denounce the violent nature of his conduct, and deter such serious offending in the future. The court concluded that this sentence met the purposes of sentencing appropriately while imposing the least restrictive outcome possible.

Orders