Legal Research
Cases
R v Smith

R v Smith

Case [2025] NZHC 2463 27 August 2025

Manslaughter

Deliberate Use of a Weapon

Minimum Period of Imprisonment

Disqualification from Driving

Guilty Plea

Remorse

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2024-090-002453

[2025] NZHC 2463

THE KING

v

ELIZABETH LYNN SMITH

Hearing: 27 August 2025

Appearances:

B D Tantrum and J T Lowyim for the Crown J M Hudson for the Defendant

Judgment:

27 August 2025

SENTENCING NOTES OF POWELL J

R v SMITH [2025] NZHC 2463 [27 August 2025]

[1] Elizabeth Smith, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty to a single charge of manslaughter.1 The charge followed an incident on Thursday, 13 June 2024 in which you ran over and killed Dean Fifield on Moire Rd in Massey.

The offending

[2] I begin by summarising what happened to bring you before the Court today. As I have discussed with counsel, in addition to the summary of facts, I have also considered the formal written statements of Luke Falconer and Cameron Hogg to better understand the circumstances of the offending.

[3] There is no dispute that you and Mr Fifield had been in a relationship that ended shortly before 13 June. When it ended you moved out of his home, but your possessions remained at the property. You attempted to make arrangements with Mr Fifield to pick up your stuff, and when this was unsuccessful sought the assistance of police on 13 June 2024, assistance which was not forthcoming.

[4] Later that evening, you appear to have been invited by Mr Fifield to come and pick up your property. Before going around to Mr Fifield’s house you told two friends, Mr Falconer and Ms Hogg, who had been available to help earlier that day, what you were going to do. You agreed with Mr Falconer and Ms Hogg that if you had not made contact with them by 9.40 pm then something was wrong. As they did not hear anything from you, they too went to Mr Fifield’s house, arriving around 11 pm. They drove up Mr Fifield’s driveway and saw your car was parked next to his house facing back down towards the road. Mr Falconer walked up to the house and located you talking to Mr Fifield in the lounge. Mr Fifield does not appear to have been happy at this development and matters were clearly tense. However, shortly thereafter you and Mr Falconer were able to remove a chest containing some of your possessions which was loaded into the boot of your car. The removal was completed without violence although there does appear to have been some pushing as the chest was taken out of the home.

1 Crimes Act 1961, ss 171, 160(2)(a) and 177(1). Maximum penalty: life imprisonment.

[5] The tension between those present was evidenced by the fact that both Ms Hogg and Mr Falconer armed themselves at different points with a bat as they were preparing to depart. You got into your car and Ms Hogg and Mr Falconer got into theirs, but as they went to reverse down the driveway Ms Hogg became…

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 Smith

Details

AGLC: R v Smith [2025] NZHC 2463
Case: [2025] NZHC 2463
Decision Date: 27 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Elizabeth Lynn Smith appeared before the High Court of New Zealand in Auckland for sentencing after pleading guilty to manslaughter. The charge stemmed from an incident on June 13, 2024, where Smith ran over and killed Dean Fifield on Moire Road in Massey. The court considered the circumstances of the incident, including the history of the relationship between Smith and Fifield, and the events leading up to the fatal encounter. Smith had gone to Fifield's house to retrieve her belongings following a breakup, accompanied by friends Luke Falconer and Cameron Hogg. Tensions escalated when Fifield confronted Smith and attacked Falconer's car, leading to the fatal incident where Smith drove into Fifield.

The court addressed the sentencing principles, emphasizing accountability, denunciation, deterrence, and the impact on Fifield's family. The starting point for sentencing was determined by comparing Smith's case with similar cases involving the deliberate use of a vehicle as a weapon. Factors such as the deliberate use of the car, Fifield's vulnerability, and Smith's actions to protect her friends were considered. The court adopted a starting point of six years and six months imprisonment, adjusted for Smith's early guilty plea and background factors, resulting in a sentence of four years and six months. An additional minimum period of imprisonment of 50 per cent and a two-year disqualification from driving post-sentence were also imposed.

Orders