R v Taurae - [2017] NZHC 2756

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2016-004-4791 [2017] NZHC 2756

THE QUEEN

v

DANNY TAURAE

Hearing: 10 November 2017

Appearances:

F Culliney for the Crown
JW Clearwater for the Defendant

Sentence:

10 November 2017

SENTENCING NOTES OF TOOGOOD J

R v Taurae [2017] NZHC 2756 [10 November 2017]

[1] Danny Taurae, you appear for sentence having been found guilty by a jury of one representative charge of common assault1 against a 53-year-old man who shared a cell with you in Mt Eden Correctional Facility in September 2015. Along with the common assault charge you were also charged with sexual offending against the victim. The jury acquitted you of those charges and I put them to one side. I respect the jury’s verdicts which were reached, I suspect, because they were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the victim had communicated clearly to you that his prior consent to sexual conduct with you no longer applied. I make it clear that I sentence you only for the assaults.

[2] The offending arose out of what was for a time a consensual sexual relationship, but that clearly became abusive. You assaulted the victim many times over a period of less than three weeks, causing substantial bruising.

Sentencing purposes and principles

[3] In sentencing you, I am required to have regard to relevant purposes and principles set out in the legislation, including the need to hold you accountable for your offending; denouncing your conduct; deterring you and others from this kind of offending; and the desirability of assisting in your rehabilitation and reintegration into the community. I must also take into account the gravity of the offending, the effect on the victim, and maintaining consistency with sentences imposed on similar offenders committing similar offences in similar circumstances.

[4] Deciding the appropriate sentence requires me to look first at what features of this offending make it more or less serious than other cases of its kind in order to reach a starting point that reflects the overall seriousness of the offending. Then I will take into account personal factors which may require the sentence to be increased or reduced from that starting point.2 That will result in the appropriate end sentence and give effect to the purposes and principles of sentencing I have mentioned.

[5] The Crown submits that this offending falls into the most serious category of common assault and that the appropriate starting point is 12 months’ imprisonment. The Crown’s position is that any personal mitigating factors are counter-balanced by the uplift necessary to recognise your previous violent offending. It is acknowledged that you are presently serving sentences of imprisonment but the Crown submits that the sentence to be imposed today should be served in addition to your current sentence to act as an effective deterrence to offending while in prison.

[6] Mr Clearwater’s submissions focus on your troubled adolescence and early adulthood, noting that you have been in the youth justice system for a considerable length of time.…

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 Taurae

Details

AGLC: R v Taurae [2017] NZHC 2756
Case: [2017] NZHC 2756
Decision Date: 10 November 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, the case of The Queen v Danny Taurae involved the defendant being sentenced for a common assault charge against a 53-year-old man in Mt Eden Correctional Facility. The court found the defendant guilty of the assault charge but acquitted him of sexual offending charges against the same victim. The legal issues before the court included determining the appropriate sentence for the common assault, taking into account the purposes and principles of sentencing, the gravity of the offending, and the effect on the victim. The court also had to consider the defendant's personal circumstances and history of offending.

The court determined that the common assault charge was at the upper end of the seriousness of such offences due to the multiple and severe aggravating factors involved, including the victim's vulnerability and the prison environment where the assaults occurred. The court found a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment appropriate but allowed a discount of two months for the defendant's youth and potential for rehabilitation, resulting in a final sentence of ten months’ imprisonment to be served cumulatively with the defendant's current sentences.

The court emphasised the need for the defendant to accept responsibility for his actions and make use of rehabilitation options available to him. The final orders included a sentence of ten months’ imprisonment for the common assault charge, to be served cumulatively with the defendant's existing sentences.

Orders