R v Wallace - [2022] NZHC 2390

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE

CRI-2019-083-1448

[2022] NZHC 2390

R

v

ZANE WALLACE

Hearing: 16 September 2022

Appearances:

C B Wilkinson-Smith and J J Harvey

D M Goodlet and J H C Waugh for the Defendant

Judgment:

16 September 2022

SENTENCING OF COOKE J

[1] Zane Wallace, you are here today to be sentenced for the murder of Jasmine Wilson.1 You will also be sentenced on a number of other charges to which you have pleaded guilty, including:

(a)two charges of injuring with intent to injure;2

(b)two charges of assault with intent to injure;3

(c)four charges of threatening to cause grievous bodily harm, one of which is representative;4

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 167(b); life imprisonment.
2      Section 189(2); maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment.
3      Section 193; maximum penalty of three years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 306(1)(a); maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.

R v WALLACE [2022] NZHC 2390 [16 September 2022]

(d)one charge of demanding with menace;5

(e)two charges of threatening to kill, one of which is representative;6 and

(f)one charge of assault;7 and

(g)one charge of male assaults female.8

[2] In explaining the sentence that I am going to impose I will first outline the facts of your offending. I will then explain the approach taken to the sentence for murder and how that is impacted on by your other charges. I will then address any relevant circumstances to your sentences before formally imposing them.

The facts

[3] You were in a relationship with Ms Wilson. Prior to her relationship with you she had a long-term partner with whom she had two children, Mr D. She also had a relationship with Mr T. Both of these men are also victims of your offending.

[4] On 13 November 2018 you saw Ms Wilson in a vehicle with a friend at a Caltex in Whanganui. You pulled your car in near to them and started yelling at Ms Wilson. When she drove off away you followed her. You forced her to pull over. You then approached the vehicle and opened the driver’s side door, pulled out the ignition, and kicked Ms Wilson with force in the side of her chest. You took the car keys and left.

[5] On 16 November 2018 Mr T was visiting Whanganui. He contacted Ms Wilson to obtain keys for a vehicle left at his home in Auckland. He received a text from Ms Wilson asking him to go to her grandmother’s house. When he did so he was met by you. You approached Mr T who was seated in the driver’s seat of his vehicle with the window rolled down. You accused Mr T of texting Ms Wilson. You asked for his cell phone. He told you it was out of battery. You then asked Mr T if he

5      Section 239(2); maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
6      Section 306(1)(a); maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
7      Section 196; maximum penalty…

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 Wallace

Details

AGLC: R v Wallace [2022] NZHC 2390
Case: [2022] NZHC 2390
Decision Date: 16 September 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Zane Wallace was convicted of the murder of Jasmine Wilson and was also found guilty of other charges including multiple counts of assault, threats to kill, and injuring with intent. The case was heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Wanganui Registry. The primary legal issue was determining the appropriate sentence for Wallace, particularly the minimum period of imprisonment for the murder charge under Section 103 of the Sentencing Act 2002, and adjusting this period to reflect the totality of his offending.

The court meticulously considered the severity of Wallace's crimes, which involved prolonged domestic violence culminating in the murder of Wilson. It examined comparable cases to ascertain an appropriate starting point for the minimum period of imprisonment. After reviewing similar cases where lengthy minimum periods were imposed, the court determined that a minimum period of 15 years was suitable for the murder charge. The court further adjusted this period by two years to account for Wallace's other serious charges, resulting in a minimum period of 17 years. Given Wallace's guilty plea and his cultural and social background, the court deducted one year and six months respectively, leading to a final minimum period of 15 and a half years.

Wallace was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder, with a minimum period of 15 and a half years before being eligible for parole. He also received concurrent sentences for the other charges, which included various terms of imprisonment ranging from three months to two years. The totality of these sentences reflected the gravity and impact of his offending, as well as the need for accountability and deterrence.

Orders