R v Waitokia

Case [2018] NZHC 2146


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE

CRI-2018-083-000018

[2018] NZHC 2146

THE QUEEN

v

HAYZE NEIHANA WAITOKIA

Counsel:

H C Mallalieu for Crown

R B Crowley for Defendant

Sentence:

21 August 2018


NOTES ON SENTENCE OF COLLINS J


Introduction

[1]                 Mr Waitokia, you appear for sentencing on one charge of wounding with intent to injure.1

[2]This afternoon I will:

(1)set out your offending;

(2)outline the effect of the three strikes regime;

(3)explain whether the manifestly unjust exception applies in your circumstances; and


1      Crimes Act 1961, s 188(2); maximum penalty seven years’ imprisonment.

R v WAITOKIA [2018] NZHC 2146 [21 August 2018]

(4)give you your final sentence.

Summary of offending

[3]                 On 4 January 2018, you were drinking alcohol with several associates at the Marton Hotel, where you were living while on bail. There is evidence you had been drinking for seven to eight hours. An argument broke out between you and the victim, who believed you had stolen his phone. The victim was sitting next to you on a couch. You produced a knife with a retractable blade and stabbed the victim in the leg about 20 cm below his knee. This happened without any warning and produced a wound approximately 2 cm in length, and 0.5 cm deep, into the victim’s calf muscle, which required medical attention including three sutures.2 You were described by police who arrived at the scene as being belligerent, aggressive and intoxicated.

Personal circumstances

[4]                 You are 26 years old. You have 14 previous convictions, including six for violent offending, many of which involved domestic violence. In 2012, you were sentenced to five months’ home detention for wounding with intent to injure. You were given your first-strike warning on this occasion. In 2014, you were sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection. You were given your second-strike warning on this occasion.  You  were sentenced to  four months’ imprisonment for domestic violence assaults in March of this year.

Three strikes regime

[5]                 This is your third-strike offence. In those circumstances, s 86D(2) of the Sentencing Act 2002 requires me to sentence you to the maximum term of imprisonment for your offence. In your case, that is a sentence of seven years’ imprisonment. There is no discretion to allow any discount for the circumstances of your offending, or for your personal circumstances. I acknowledge that this sentence is disproportionate to the gravity of your offending, but that is the intent of the three


2      The summary of facts refers to the wound being 5 cm long. The medical report on file and witness statements refer to the wound being 2 cm long. The wound was to the front and side of the victim’s lower right leg. The unusual location of the wound is not relevant to my assessment. It is possible that, as the victim was sitting on a couch, he may have raised his bent legs to bear the brunt…

Continue reading R v Waitokia

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Waitokia [2018] NZHC 2146
Case
[2018] NZHC 2146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Whanganui Registry, the defendant, Hayze Neihana Waitokia, was sentenced for one count of wounding with intent to injure. The legal issues that the court had to address were whether the defendant's sentence should be imposed under the three strikes regime and if the manifestly unjust exception applied to his circumstances. The court considered the defendant's history of violent offending, his lack of understanding of the earlier warnings, and the need for community protection when deciding on the sentence. The court concluded that it would not be manifestly unjust to order the defendant to serve his sentence without parole, given the severity of his previous offences and the risk of reoffending. The defendant was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment, to be served without parole.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.