R v Sampson-Arps - [2022] NZHC 2720

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2021-009-1055

[2022] NZHC 2720

THE KING

v

SHANE DAVID SAMPSON-ARPS

Hearing: 19 October 2022

Appearances:

P N M Brown for Crown K J Basire for Defendant

Sentencing:

19 October 2022

SENTENCING REMARKS OF EATON J

R v SAMPSON-ARPS [2022] NZHC 2720 [19 October 2022]

Introduction

[1] Shane David Sampson-Arps is to be sentenced, having pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure,1 arson2 and perverting the course of justice.3

Facts

[2] The facts of your offending, Mr Sampson-Arps, have been captured in the prosecution summary of facts.

[3] You were a patched member of the Mongrel Mob Barbarian Stormtrooper faction. At approximately 7 pm on 13 November 2020, you and the victim were at an associate’s address in Christchurch for a birthday party. You had with you a hoodie with a Stormtrooper gang insignia printed on it and you began posting photos on the Mongrel Mob Facebook page of people at the party wearing the hoodie.

[4] That upset other gang members and a short time later the victim’s brother, who was also a patched member of the same faction, arrived at the address with others and demanded the hoodie. This led to a fight between you and the victim’s brother outside of the address.

[5] The victim stepped in and attempted to break up the fight. That angered you, and you began striking the victim repeatedly in the face with closed fists until he fell to the ground. He got back to his feet and told you that you still had not knocked him out. He then spat at you. You again punched him in the head, causing him again to fall to the ground. While he was on the ground you kicked his body.

[6]Police arrived soon after and you hid inside the party address.

[7] You continued drinking throughout the evening and you continued to be very angry.

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 188(2): maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
2      Section 267(1)(b): maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 117(e): maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.

[8] At around 11.45 pm you picked up a screwdriver and you left the address. You were looking for your victim’s brother’s vehicle. Unable to find his vehicle, you popped the rear corner window panel of the victim’s vehicle. You reached inside, lighting the rear passenger seat cover with a lighter. The flame spread quickly, engulfing the inside of the vehicle and ultimately burning it out completely.

[9] This offending resulted in the charges of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure and arson. You were remanded in custody following your arrest in early February 2021.

[10] The charge of perverting the course of justice relates to a series of outgoing prisoner phone calls that you made to various people while you were on remand. On 17 February 2022, that is a year after your arrest, the Police…

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 Sampson-Arps

Details

AGLC: R v Sampson-Arps [2022] NZHC 2720
Case: [2022] NZHC 2720
Decision Date: 19 October 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Shane David Sampson-Arps was sentenced for causing grievous bodily harm with intent to injure, arson, and perverting the course of justice. The court considered the aggravating and mitigating factors for each offence, and the totality principle, to determine an appropriate starting point. For the grievous bodily harm charge, the court found three aggravating factors, including the attack on the victim's head and the gang-related nature of the offence. The starting point was set at two years and nine months' imprisonment. For the arson charge, the court found the offending to be at the bottom end of intentional arson and set an uplift of 12 months to the starting point. For the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice, the court considered the prolonged and concerted nature of the offending and set a starting point of three years' imprisonment. The court then adjusted the starting point to reflect the totality principle and personal factors, resulting in a final sentence of four years and six months' imprisonment.

Orders