R v Sang-Yum - [2016] NZHC 2329

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2015-092-7210 [2016] NZHC 2329

THE QUEEN

v

TREVOR SANG-YUM AND MARTIN SANG-YUM

Hearing: 30 September 2016

Appearances:

B R Smith and R M Gibbs for the Crown
I Koya for Mr T Sang-Yum
M Hislop for Mr M Sang-Yum

Sentencing:

30 September 2016

SENTENCING NOTES OF WOODHOUSE J

Solicitors / Counsel:
Mr B R Smith and Ms R M Gibbs, Kayes Fletcher Walker, Office of the Crown Solicitor, Manukau
Mr I Koya, Barrister, Auckland
Mr M Hislop, Barrister, Auckland

R v SANG-YUM [2016] NZHC 2329 [30 September 2016]

[1] Mr Martin Sang-Yum and Mr Trevor Sang-Yum, you may remain seated while I explain, not just to you but to the public, the sentence I am going to impose. It will take some time.

Martin Sang-Yum: offences

[2] Martin Sang-Yum, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to eight charges under the Crimes Act. These are: (1) causing grievous bodily harm with reckless disregard; (2) assault with a weapon; (3) common assault; (4) intentionally damaging property; (5) unlawfully taking a motor vehicle; (6) two charges of theft; and (7) breach of Police bail.

[3] All of the offences occurred on 14 June 2015, apart from the breach of bail. The offences on 14 June occurred when you were with your cousin, Trevor Sang- Yum, who is also to be sentenced for offences committed on that occasion and one other offence.

[4] The offences of causing grievous bodily harm, intentional damage and unlawfully taking a car all have maximum penalties of 7 years imprisonment and the assault with a weapon has a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.

Trevor Sang-Yum: offences

[5] Trevor Sang-Yum, you appear for sentence for theft committed on 27 May

2015, and for six offences when you were with your cousin on 14 June 2015. Your offences on 14 June are: (1) assault with a weapon; (2) three charges of common assault – by kicking, by punching the victim in a headlock, and by punching him in the face; (3) unlawfully taking a motor vehicle; and (4) one charge of theft.

Facts relating to the 14 June offences

[6] I will outline the facts relating to the offences the two of you committed on

14 June 2015.

[7] On the afternoon of Sunday, 14 June the two of you were in a Subaru car on a road in Manurewa. The victim was also driving on the road at the same time in a BMW. To begin with, he was behind your car. According to Martin Sang-Yum’s statement to the probation officer, at one point the victim flashed the lights of his car when behind you, and then went past, at which point Trevor Sang-Yum put his head out the window and started swearing at the driver. I should say that I acknowledge that that is not in the summary of facts and not a factor that I am going to hold against you. But it is part of 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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Sang-Yum and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2016] NZHC 2329
Decision Date: 30 September 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Martin Sang-Yum and Trevor Sang-Yum were before the High Court of New Zealand for sentencing after pleading guilty to multiple charges stemming from two separate incidents. Martin faced charges including causing grievous bodily harm with reckless disregard, assault with a weapon, common assault, intentionally damaging property, unlawfully taking a motor vehicle, theft, and breach of bail. Trevor was sentenced for theft and multiple offences committed alongside Martin. The offences involved a road rage incident where Martin and Trevor assaulted a victim, causing severe injuries, including the amputation of the victim's leg.

The court considered the severity of the offences, the use of a weapon, pre-meditation, and the vulnerability of the victim. Martin's starting point was set at 6 years imprisonment for the most serious offence of causing grievous bodily harm with reckless disregard. The court increased the sentence by 12 months to account for other offences, resulting in a total sentence of 7 years imprisonment. Personal factors such as Martin's young age, low IQ, substance abuse issues, and remorse led to a reduction of 9 months. Additionally, Martin received a 25% reduction for his guilty pleas, resulting in a final sentence of 4 years and 8 months imprisonment.

Trevor's starting point for the assault with a weapon was set at 2 years and 8 months imprisonment, considering the pre-meditated nature and violence involved. Personal mitigating factors, including his genuine remorse and recognition of his need for change, reduced the sentence to 2 years and 1 month for the June 14 offences. Trevor received a 25% reduction for his guilty pleas, resulting in a final sentence of 2 years and 1 month. For the separate theft offence, Trevor received a cumulative sentence of 3 months imprisonment, making his total sentence 2 years and 4 months.

Orders