Tauri v The King - [2023] NZHC 870

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2022-404-403

[2023] NZHC 870

BETWEEN
CHRISTOPHER TAURI

Appellant

AND

THE KING

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondents

Hearing: 13 February 2023

Counsel:

K Snelgar for Appellant T Riley for Respondents (Via VMR)

Judgment:

1 May 2023

JUDGMENT OF HINTON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 1 May 2023 at 9.00 am.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date: ………………………….

Solicitors: Kayes Fletcher Walker, Manukau

TAURI v R [2023] NZHC 870 [1 May 2023]

[1]This is yet another tragic sentencing case.

[2] The appellant, Christopher Tauri, aged 55, pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated robbery, three charges of driving while disqualified (third or subsequent) and one charge of driving with excess blood alcohol (third or subsequent). He was sentenced by Judge Yelavich in the Manukau District Court on 6 July 2022 to an effective term of 3 years, 5 months’ imprisonment. The Judge also made an order disqualifying Mr Tauri from driving for one year and one day.

[3]Mr Tauri appeals.

Summary of submissions

[4] Mr Tauri says that the end sentence is manifestly excessive in that a discount of 30 per cent, rather than 20 per cent, should have been allowed for his social and cultural deprivation, particularly his abuse in State care. The discount would also reflect his remorse, willingness to address the underlying cause of his offending and desire to engage in restorative justice.

[5] The respondents submit that the appeal should be dismissed. They say the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The discount of 20 per cent was within range and, to the extent it was open to the Judge to allow a greater discount, this was balanced by the starting point and uplifts which arguably were generous to Mr Tauri.

Offending

[6] I first summarise the earlier driving offences and then turn to the aggravated robbery offending:

(a)On 31 October 2019, Mr Tauri was driving in Manurewa as a disqualified driver. In explanation he said he drove to get a food parcel from the Salvation Army.

(b)On 8 May 2020, Mr Tauri was driving in Ngātea as a disqualified driver. In explanation he said he was heading to

Auckland to “sort a few things out” and that he thought he would not be stopped.

(c)On 16 June 2020, Mr Tauri was driving in Manurewa as a disqualified driver when he was stopped by Police who observed him swerving in his lane. He admitted he had been consuming alcohol and evidential blood test procedures established his blood contained 108 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood. This was double the legal limit.

[7] The aggravated robbery offending occurred on 20 July 2021. Mr Tauri entered the Thirsty Liquor store on St George Street, Papatoetoe and asked the victim to sell him alcohol. The victim refused due to Mr Tauri’s apparent level of intoxication and asked him to leave.

[8] Mr Tauri approached the victim behind the counter and punched him in…

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 Tauri v The King

Details

AGLC: Tauri v The King [2023] NZHC 870
Case: [2023] NZHC 870
Decision Date: 1 May 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand considered an appeal by Christopher Tauri against his sentence for aggravated robbery and multiple driving-related charges. Tauri, who has a history of offending and significant personal and cultural background factors, argued that the 20 per cent discount allowed for his circumstances was insufficient and that a 30 per cent discount was warranted. The court assessed Tauri's traumatic upbringing, history of abuse, chronic health conditions, and mental health issues, concluding that these factors had a significant causative contribution to his offending. The court found that Tauri's prospects for rehabilitation, particularly with appropriate support, were realistic. Given the severity of Tauri's background, the court determined that a 30 per cent discount was appropriate, making the original sentence manifestly excessive. The court reduced the sentence for the aggravated robbery to 2 years and 11 months' imprisonment, maintaining the other sentences concurrent. The court recommended that Tauri receive support for trauma-related counselling, stable accommodation, and abstinence from alcohol to facilitate his rehabilitation and successful reintegration into the community.

Orders