R v Tranter - [2020] NZHC 884

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2018-009-004865

[2020] NZHC 884

THE QUEEN

v

RICHARD ROBERT TRANTER

Hearing: 1 May 2020

Appearances:

C J Boshier for the Crown

A J D Bamford and E Riddell for the Defendant

Sentence:

1 May 2020

SENTENCING NOTES OF WYLIE J

Solicitors/counsel:
Raymond Donnelly & Co, Christchurch Bamford Law/E J Riddell, Nelson

R v TRANTER [2020] NZHC 884 [1 May 2020]

Introduction

[1] Mr Tranter, you appear for sentence today after you were found guilty following a trial by jury of manslaughter and after you pleaded guilty to a charge of driving with excess blood alcohol. The maximum sentence for manslaughter is life imprisonment; for a first or second offence of driving with excess blood alcohol the maximum penalty is three months imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $4,500.00. In addition, I must order that you be disqualified from driving.

[2] Unfortunately, your sentencing has been delayed because of the COVID-19 crisis. You are being sentenced by video link – that is not ideal, but it has resulted in the sentencing being able to proceed today.

Relevant facts

[3] At approximately 10:30 pm on Tuesday the 2nd of January 2018, you were the driver of a BMW motor vehicle travelling south on Russley Road, Christchurch.

[4] The section of Russley Road that you were travelling on is designated as part of State Highway 1. It is in good condition and it has four lanes – two going in each direction. They are divided by a raised centre barrier. The posted speed limit is 80 kph, dropping to 60 kph where the road enters a residential area close to where it intersects with Yaldhurst Road. The weather was cool but fine and the lighting was good.

[5] Your car should not have been on the road at all. It was unregistered and unwarranted. The rear tyres were a mismatch. Further they were directional tyres and they had been wrongly fitted, with the result that the tread on each was going in the wrong direction. The rear brake pads were worn and there was a warning light on your dashboard showing this at the relevant time.

[6] You should not have been driving. You had been drinking alcohol. Analysis of your blood showed that you had 112 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. This was well above the legal limit – it is 50 milligrams of alcohol per 100

millilitres of blood for an infringement notice and 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood for an offence.

[7] The evidence at your trial suggested that you were not wearing a seat belt at the time. Further you must have chosen to ignore the brake warning light showing on your dashboard. You had deactivated two of the vehicle’s safety systems – namely the ABS brakes and the dynamic stability control system. Again, there were warning lights on your dashboard showing that these systems…

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 Tranter

Details

AGLC: R v Tranter [2020] NZHC 884
Case: [2020] NZHC 884
Decision Date: 1 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Richard Tranter, was found guilty of manslaughter and pleaded guilty to driving with excess blood alcohol. The court sentenced Tranter to eight years and three months' imprisonment for manslaughter and three months' imprisonment for driving with excess blood alcohol, to be served concurrently. The court also disqualified Tranter from driving for six years, to commence on the day of his release from custody. The court declined to impose a minimum period of imprisonment, leaving Tranter's release date to the Parole Board.

The court considered various aggravating and mitigating factors in reaching its decision. Aggravating factors included Tranter's excessive speed, poor driving, aggressive driving, distracted driving, previous convictions for driving offenses, and his false claims to minimize his involvement in the crash. Mitigating factors included Tranter's expressed interest in rehabilitation for his alcohol and drug dependency. The court declined to allow a discount for Tranter's personal circumstances or remorse, finding that his background did not explain or excuse his offending, and that he showed no genuine remorse.

Orders