Rangi v The King - [2025] NZHC 2209

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2025-488-000087

[2025] NZHC 2209

BETWEEN
DJ RANGI

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 5 August 2025

Appearances:

M Creamer (on behalf of S Thode) for Appellant P Hamber for Respondent

Judgment:

7 August 2025

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on appeal against sentence]

This judgment was delivered by Justice Lang On 7 August 2025 at 10.00 am
Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:…………………………

Solicitors/counsel:
Thode Utting, Auckland
Marsden Woods Inskip Smith, Crown Solicitor, Whangarei

RANGI v R [2025] NZHC 2209 [7 August 2025]

[1] Mr Rangi pleaded guilty in the District Court to a representative charge of kidnapping1 and a charge with injuring with intent to injure.2 Those charges were laid by the Crown.

[2] In addition, Mr Rangi pleaded guilty to two charges laid by the police. These were charges of driving whilst disqualified in its aggravated form3 and failing to stop for police.4

[3] On 29 May 2025, Judge D J McDonald sentenced Mr Rangi to five years’ imprisonment on the kidnapping charge.5 He imposed concurrent sentences on the remaining charges.

[4] Mr Rangi appeals against sentence. He contends the Judge adopted a starting point for the kidnapping charge that was too high and then failed to give him adequate discounts to reflect mitigating factors. He says this resulted in an end sentence that is manifestly excessive.

The offending

The charges of kidnapping and injuring with intent to injure

[5] The charges of kidnapping and injuring with intent to injure were laid as a result of an incident that occurred on 5 September 2024. On that day, Mr Rangi was travelling in his vehicle with his partner of five years duration. During the journey, he asked her questions relating to a two-hour time period in which she had failed to respond to his calls and texts. He believed that she was being unfaithful to him.

[6] Mr Rangi was not satisfied with the answers his partner gave to his questions. He turned off the main highway onto a gravelled side road. As he did so, he told his partner that he was doing this so that no-one would see the two of them. He then began to strike her without warning.

1      Crimes Act 1961, s 209(b).
2      Section 189(2).
3      Land Transport Act 1998, s 32(1)(a).
4      Section 52A.
5      New Zealand Police v Rangi [2025] NZDC 12512.

[7] When Mr Rangi’s partner tried to get out of the vehicle, he grabbed her in a headlock and pulled her back into it. Every time she attempted to get out of the vehicle, he prevented her from doing so. He struck her numerous times on her legs, arms, body, head and face. He also spat on her face on several occasions. In doing so, he told her that she deserved to be spat on because that is how she made him feel. He also laughed at his partner when she began crying as he struck…

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 Rangi v The King

Details

AGLC: Rangi v The King [2025] NZHC 2209
Case: [2025] NZHC 2209
Decision Date: 7 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

DJ Rangi appeals against a sentence imposed by Judge D J McDonald in the Whangarei District Court. The appellant was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for kidnapping and injuring with intent, as well as concurrent sentences for driving while disqualified and failing to stop for police. Rangi argues that the starting point for the kidnapping charge was too high and that the sentence imposed does not adequately reflect mitigating factors, resulting in a manifestly excessive sentence. The court considered whether the starting point was too high, and whether the discounts for guilty pleas, remorse, and rehabilitative efforts were adequate.

The court found that the starting point of five years six months' imprisonment for the kidnapping and violence charges was not outside the available range. The court also found that the Judge did not err in applying a 15% discount for guilty pleas, and in not applying further discounts for remorse or rehabilitative efforts. The court found that Rangi's extensive criminal history, which spans 26 years and encompasses various forms of criminal activity, did not warrant further discounts. The court also found that the Judge was entitled to weigh the comments Rangi made in his letter against his history of offending. The appeal against sentence is dismissed.

Orders