Simon v Police - [2012] NZHC 2610

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

CRI-2012-425-33 [2012] NZHC 2610

CRAIG JONATHON SIMON
Appellant
v

NEW ZEALAND POLICE
Respondent

Counsel: R Smith for Appellant
L Cole for Respondent

Judgment: 8 October 2012

(ORAL) JUDGMENT OF LANG J [on appeal against sentence]

CRAIG JONATHON SIMON V NEW ZEALAND POLICE HC INV CRI-2012-425-33 [8 October 2012]

[1] Mr Simon pleaded guilty in the District Court to two charges of careless driving, one charge of refusing an officer’s request for a blood specimen and two charges of failing to stop or ascertain injury.

[2] On 26 June 2012, Judge Turner ordered Mr Simon to perform 225 hours community work. He also sentenced him to nine months supervision, and directed him to pay the sum of $1,288.19 by way of reparation. In addition, he disqualified Mr Simon from driving for a period of ten months.[1]
[1] New Zealand Police v Simon DC Invercargill CRI-2012-025-000758, 26 June 2012.

[3] Mr Simon now appeals to this Court against the sentence of community work that the Judge imposed. He argues that the sentence is excessive, having regard to the overall gravity of his offending.

[4] In order to understand the issue that the appeal raises, it is necessary to set the facts out in some detail.

The facts

[5] All of the charges arise out of a series of events that began at approximately

5 pm on 20 March 2012. At that time a member of the public observed Mr Simon sitting in his vehicle at Queen’s Park consuming methylated spirits. This so concerned the member of the public that he endeavoured to persuade Mr Simon to hand over his car keys. He then tried to take the car keys away from Mr Simon.

[6] Mr Simon did not heed the advice clearly given to him by the member of the public. Instead, he drove away and, a few minutes later, stopped at a red traffic light at the intersection of Jed and Tay Streets. When the lights turned green, Mr Simon did not respond in any way. He remained stationary at the traffic lights until the lights changed back to red. When the lights turned green again, he moved his vehicle in and out of reverse a couple of times and then suddenly reversed backwards. This caused his vehicle to collide with a vehicle standing stationary behind him. The force of the collision was sufficient to shunt the other vehicle
backwards.

[7] By this stage, the lights had changed back to red again. Rather than continue waiting, Mr Simon put his car into gear and drove forward through the red light. He made no effort to stop and/or check on the welfare of the occupants of the vehicle with which he had just collided. Fortunately, however, the sole occupant of that vehicle did not suffer any injury as a result of the collision.

[8] Mr Simon continued driving and, a few minutes later, was driving east on Ettrick Street behind a bus. The…

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 Simon v Police

Details

AGLC: Simon v Police [2012] NZHC 2610
Case: [2012] NZHC 2610
Decision Date: 8 October 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Craig Jonathon Simon has appealed against the sentence imposed on him by the District Court in relation to multiple driving-related charges. The charges stem from a series of incidents in which Mr Simon drove while intoxicated, collided with two vehicles, and refused to provide a blood specimen upon request. The District Court imposed a sentence of 225 hours of community work, nine months of supervision, a payment of $1,288.19 as reparation, and disqualified Mr Simon from driving for ten months. Mr Simon appeals against the community work component of his sentence, arguing that it is excessive in light of the overall gravity of his offending.

In assessing the appeal, the court considered the nature and circumstances of Mr Simon's offending. The court noted that Mr Simon had been drinking methylated spirits prior to driving, had collided with two vehicles while driving erratically, and had refused to provide a blood specimen when requested. The court found that the seriousness of Mr Simon's conduct warranted a deterrent sentence. The court concluded that the sentence of 225 hours of community work, while at the upper end of the available range, was not manifestly excessive in light of the gravity of Mr Simon's conduct.

In conclusion, the court dismissed Mr Simon's appeal against the sentence of community work imposed by the District Court. The court found that the sentence was appropriate given the seriousness of Mr Simon's conduct and did not exceed the range of available sentences. The appeal is therefore dismissed, and the original sentence stands.

Orders