Sekai v Police - [2014] NZHC 1348

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI 2014-409-41 [2014] NZHC 1348

BETWEEN
SIMON BARRY SEKAI

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 12 June 2014

Appearances:

L Drummond for Appellant
D J Orchard for Respondent

Judgment:

16 June 2014

JUDGMENT OF MANDER J

Introduction

[1] The appellant was sentenced by Judge Ongley on two unrelated pieces of offending involving reckless driving and intentional damage. He was sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 10 months. He appeals that sentence on various grounds, primarily on the basis that the starting point adopted for the sentence in respect of the offence of reckless driving was too high, that the sentence for a related charge of disqualified driving should not have been imposed cumulatively and that he was not afforded the appropriate discount for the entry of his guilty pleas.

Circumstances of reckless driving

[2] On 3 October 2013, the appellant was observed driving at excessive speed. A Police patrol caught up with the appellant and stopped him after activating the patrol vehicle’s red and blue flashing lights. As the officer approached the appellant’s
vehicle the appellant sped away.

SEKAI v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2014] NZHC 1348 [16 June 2014]

[3] The Police patrol pursued the appellant, however he did not stop. During the course of the pursuit he travelled at speeds in excess of 150 kph and drove through numerous intersections while the traffic lights were red. He made no attempt to slow at these intersections. The appellant made a number of U-turns into oncoming traffic in an attempt to evade the pursuing Police patrols. One of these turns was conducted on a motorway and caused the appellant to drive his vehicle against the flow of traffic at 100 kph. Other vehicles on the road were forced to take evasive action to avoid collision. As a result of the danger to the public the pursuit was abandoned when the appellant travelled the wrong way on the motorway. During the course of the pursuit the appellant swerved his vehicle towards one of the pursuing Police cars, requiring it to take evasive action to avoid collision.

[4] As a result of the appellant’s driving, he was charged with reckless driving

and failing to stop for lights and sirens. He received the maximum sentence of

3 months imprisonment and disqualified from driving for 2 years. The appellant who was subject to a disqualification order at the time also received a cumulative sentence of 2 months imprisonment for driving whilst disqualified.

Intentional damage

[5] On 11 October 2013, the appellant was involved in a domestic dispute with his partner. As a result of the argument the appellant’s partner left the address, leaving him alone at the residence. In the wake of the argument and a subsequent telephone call from his partner, the appellant became enraged and vandalised the house.

[6] The appellant smashed in excess of 20 holes in the walls of various rooms, broke a window in the dining room, pulled…

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 Sekai v Police

Details

AGLC: Sekai v Police [2014] NZHC 1348
Case: [2014] NZHC 1348
Decision Date: 16 June 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Simon Barry Sekai, appealed his sentence of 10 months' imprisonment for two separate offences: reckless driving and intentional damage. The sentencing judge, Ongley, imposed a maximum sentence of 3 months for reckless driving, a cumulative 2-month sentence for driving while disqualified, and 5 months for intentional damage. The appellant argued that the starting point for the reckless driving sentence was too high, the sentence for disqualified driving should not have been cumulative, and he was not given an appropriate discount for his guilty pleas. The Crown argued that the maximum sentence for reckless driving was appropriate given the dangerous nature of the appellant's conduct and the imposition of a cumulative sentence for disqualified driving was justified. The court found that the sentence for reckless driving was appropriate, as was the cumulative sentence for disqualified driving. The court found that the overall sentence did not offend the principle of totality, and dismissed the appeal. The court held that the sentencing judge was entitled to impose a maximum penalty for reckless driving given the dangerous nature of the appellant's conduct, and the imposition of a cumulative sentence for disqualified driving was justified as it was an offence of a different kind. The court also found that the sentence for intentional damage was within the range available to the sentencing judge and that the discount for the appellant's guilty plea was a matter of discretion for the sentencing judge. The court found that the overall sentence did not offend the principle of totality and dismissed the appeal.

Orders