Rawlings v The the Queen

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2022-409-3

CRI-2022-409-4 [2022] NZHC 914

BETWEEN
JOSHUA ADAM RAWLINGS

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Hearing: 28 April 2022

Appearances:

K White for Appellant

G Alloway for Respondent

Judgment:

3 May 2022

(SUPPLEMENTARY) JUDGMENT OF OSBORNE J

RAWLINGS v R [2022] NZHC 914 [3 May 2022]

[1] By my judgment dated 28 April 2022 I allowed Mr Rawlings’ appeal against sentence and imposed a number of other sentences.1

[2] The end sentence on the lead offence was ordered to be (in lieu of that previously imposed) 22 months’ imprisonment.2

[3] That end sentence took into account, amongst other matters, an uplift of two months to represent cancelled fines, in contrast to the three months imposed in the District Court.3

[4] It has been brought to my attention that the orders made (at [62] of the appeal judgment) do not expressly state an outcome in relation to the cancelled fines.

[5] For the avoidance of doubt, I confirm that in the way the end sentences were imposed on appeal in lieu of the District Court sentences, the end sentence of 22 months on the lead charge took into account an uplift of two months to represent cancelled fines.

[6]Therefore there are the additional orders as follows.

Additional orders

[7]I order:

(a)the remission of fines directed by the District Court stands; and

(b)the sentence of three months’ imprisonment (to represent remitted fines) is quashed.

Osborne J

Solicitors:
Public Defence Service, Christchurch Crown Solicitor, Christchurch

1      R v Rawlings [2022] NZHC 879.
2      At [62(c)(i)].
3      At [60]–[61].

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Rawlings v The Queen was heard in the High Court of New Zealand Christchurch Registry. The appellant, Joshua Adam Rawlings, appealed against his sentence following a conviction in the District Court. The respondent, The Queen, was represented by G Alloway. The appeal hearing took place on 28 April 2022, with K White appearing for the appellant. The judgment was delivered on 3 May 2022. The court's role was to review the sentence imposed by the District Court and determine whether any changes were warranted based on the appeal.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was appropriate and whether the appellant's appeal against the sentence was justified. The court had to consider the nature of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the principles of sentencing. The court also needed to address the specific issue of the remission of fines and its impact on the overall sentence.

In delivering the judgment, the court acknowledged that the original orders did not explicitly address the outcome in relation to the cancelled fines. The court clarified that the end sentence of 22 months on the lead charge, which was imposed in lieu of the District Court sentence, already accounted for an uplift of two months to represent the cancelled fines. To rectify this oversight, the court issued additional orders. These orders confirmed that the remission of fines directed by the District Court remained in effect, and the sentence of three months' imprisonment, intended to represent the remitted fines, was quashed.

The court's supplementary judgment and additional orders ensure that the sentence reflects the intended uplift for the cancelled fines, providing clarity and finality to the case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established