R v Wyant - [2015] NZHC 3076

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME(S), ADDRESS(ES), OCCUPATION(S) OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF WITNESS/VICTIM/CONNECTED PERSON(S) PURSUANT TO S 202
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 2011.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DUNEDIN REGISTRY

CRI-2015-012-000570 [2015] NZHC 3076

THE QUEEN

v

ANNABELLE WYANT

Hearing: 4 December 2015

Appearances:

R P Bates for Crown
A Stevens and D L Henderson for Defendant

Judgment:

4 December 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF DUNNINGHAM J

[1] Annabelle Wyant, you are here to be sentenced having pleaded guilty to, and being convicted on, charges of the attempted murder, unlawful possession of a firearm and driving with excess blood alcohol.

The background facts

[2] The background facts are that you were 34 years old at the relevant time, and the single mother of two children.

R v WYANT [2015] NZHC 3076 [4 December 2015]

[3] On 6 March 2015 you had been drinking alcohol at your home, and then with a friend of yours at your friend’s address. At about 3.00 pm that afternoon, while intoxicated, you drove to your children’s school to pick them up and take them home. You have also disclosed to the writer of the pre-sentence report that you had been using “Rock”, a solid form of ecstasy, along with alcohol on that day.

[4] When you arrived home, you went to your bedroom and picked up a .22 calibre hand gun from your drawers, along with ammunition for that gun. You then loaded the gun and got into your car and drove to your victim’s house. He is someone known to you and your family as he is the partner of a relative of yours, and your parents have also had unsatisfactory business dealings with him.

[5] You drove up the driveway of your victim’s house and tooted your horn to indicate your arrival. Your victim left the house, came up to the car, and attempted to speak to you, and he said you appeared to be in an agitated state. Without warning, you picked up the firearm from the front passenger seat, you pointed it at your victim and fired a shot at him, striking him in the chest area. You then attempted to fire a second shot, but the firearm malfunctioned and your victim was able to wrestle the firearm off you. You immediately left the scene in your car.

[6] Your victim was able to contact emergency services and was flown to

Dunedin hospital by helicopter with life threatening injuries.

[7] You returned to your home and then drove yourself to the Dunedin Central

Police Station, where you handed yourself in.

[8] At the station, your blood alcohol level was tested and it was found to be

1554 micrograms of alcohol per litre of blood.

[9] Your victim had a bullet lodged in his upper torso which medical staff decided would be too dangerous to attempt to remove. He did, however, spend six days in hospital, before he was discharged.

[10] On 7 March 2015, you were interviewed by Police about the above…

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 Wyant

Details

AGLC: R v Wyant [2015] NZHC 3076
Case: [2015] NZHC 3076
Decision Date: 4 December 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of The Queen v Annabelle Wyant, heard in the High Court of New Zealand, involved a conviction for attempted murder, unlawful possession of a firearm, and driving with excess blood alcohol. The central dispute was the appropriate sentencing for these serious charges. The defendant, Annabelle Wyant, had pleaded guilty to these charges and was subjected to a thorough sentencing hearing. The legal issues before the court involved determining the appropriate starting point for the sentence for the attempted murder, considering both aggravating and mitigating factors, and then adjusting this based on Wyant's personal circumstances, remorse, and health conditions.

The court's reasoning began with an analysis of the attempted murder as the lead offence, taking into account both the aggravating and mitigating features. Aggravating factors included the use of a dangerous weapon, premeditation, and the serious injuries inflicted on the victim. Mitigating factors considered were the defendant's intoxication and the history of intimidation by the victim. The court decided that a starting point of six and a half years was appropriate for the attempted murder, reflecting the mitigating impact of the victim's prior intimidation. The court also factored in the defendant's personal background, which included health issues, a troubled upbringing, and a history of substance abuse. These factors, while not excusing her actions, provided context for her behaviour. The court also acknowledged Wyant's remorse and her efforts to address her addictions.

After considering all these factors, the court applied a 15% reduction for remorse and rehabilitative prospects, followed by a 20% discount for her guilty plea. This resulted in a final sentence of four years and five months for the attempted murder. For the other charges of unlawful possession of a firearm and driving with excess blood alcohol, the court imposed concurrent sentences of nine months and six months, respectively, along with a disqualification from driving for 13 months. The court also issued an order under section 202 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 to suppress the victim's identity.

Orders