R v Raroa - [2012] NZHC 1281

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND GISBORNE REGISTRY

CRI-2011-082-0360

CRI-2011-041-1871 [2012] NZHC 1281

THE QUEEN

v

CLEVELAND SONNY RAROA

Hearing: 8 June 2012

Counsel: CR Walker and F Cleary for Crown
PJ Jensen for Prisoner

Judgment: 8 June 2012

SENTENCING REMARKS OF LANG J

R V CLEVELAND SONNY RAROA HC GIS CRI-2011-082-0360 [8 June 2012]

[1] Mr Cleveland Raroa, you appear for sentence having been found guilty by a jury on one charge of participating in an organised criminal group. The maximum sentence for that offence is ten years imprisonment.

Facts

[2] As you are aware, I have just sentenced your father who was also found guilty of participating in an organised criminal group.[1] That charge arose out of the same series of events that led to the charge against you.

[1] R v Riki Raroa [2012] NZHC 1279.

[3] I do not propose to repeat the factual background set out in my sentencing remarks when I sentenced your father. The remarks that I now make must be read together with those that I made in relation to your father.

[4] Put shortly, your offending arose out of a series of events that occurred at a time of high tension between the Black Power and Mongrel Mob gangs in Wairoa. You have been a patched member of the Mongrel Mob gang for some time. That was virtually inevitable because your father has been a patched member of the Mongrel Mob for many, many years, and I have no doubt that you grew up steeped in the Mongrel Mob culture. It was, as your counsel submits, virtually inevitable that you would join the Mongrel Mob when you came of age because you have known, I suspect, nothing else throughout your life. Your friends, associates and family all live by the Mongrel Mob code and within its culture.

[5] Violent incidents in the Wairoa area between the Mongrel Mob and Black Power occurred with some frequency during the period leading up to October 2010. In addition, there were disputes between two factions of the Mongrel Mob in Wairoa that had led to a wide-scale confrontation involving firearms in August 2010. Following that, many of the Wairoa Mongrel Mob members were removed from the scene, and your father assumed responsibility for looking after some of the affairs of
the Wairoa chapter, including the protection of its headquarters, or pad.

[6] Tensions became heightened over the weekend of 24 October 2010 because, in a stupid endeavour, a member of the Mongrel Mob stole a car belonging to associates of the Black Power. He drove the vehicle to the Mongrel Mob pad in Wairoa, and the police found both him and the vehicle there. Even if it was not intended to do so, this incident was bound to provoke Black Power into some form of retaliation.

[7] Your father realised that, so he placed the Mongrel Mob in Wairoa on red alert. This meant that he organised for people, including yourself, to man…

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 Raroa

Details

AGLC: R v Raroa [2012] NZHC 1281
Case: [2012] NZHC 1281
Decision Date: 8 June 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Raroa involves the sentencing of Cleveland Sonny Raroa, who was found guilty by a jury of participating in an organised criminal group. The maximum penalty for this offence is ten years imprisonment. The dispute arose from a series of events that occurred in Wairoa involving high tensions between the Black Power and Mongrel Mob gangs, with Raroa being a patched member of the Mongrel Mob gang.

The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for Raroa, taking into account his culpability and the purposes of sentencing. The court considered the events leading up to the offending, Raroa's role within the gang, and the mitigating and aggravating factors present in his case. The court also examined the impact of a custodial sentence on Raroa's potential to leave the gang lifestyle.

The court determined that Raroa's starting point for sentencing should be four years imprisonment, reflecting his culpability which was lower than that of his father but not significantly so. The court found no aggravating factors and acknowledged the mitigating factors of Raroa's young age and the time he had spent under curfew. However, the court concluded that imprisonment was necessary to effectively remove Raroa from gang involvement and to achieve the purposes of denunciation and deterrence. The court reduced the sentence by six months to reflect the mitigating factors, resulting in a final sentence of three years and six months imprisonment.

The final orders of the court were that Cleveland Sonny Raroa be sentenced to three years and six months imprisonment for participating in an organised criminal group.

Orders