Te Kani v The King - [2025] NZHC 423

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2024-404-643

CRI-2024-404-644 [2025] NZHC 423

BETWEEN
WAATA TE KANI

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Defendant

Hearing: 3 March 2025

Appearances:

S McColgan for the Appellant S Wakefield for the Respondent

Judgment:

7 March 2025

JUDGMENT OF GORDON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 7 March 2025 at 12 pm

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

Solicitors/Counsel:
Meredith Connell, Auckland
S McColgan, Barrister, Auckland

TE KANI v R [2025] NZHC 423 [7 March 2025]

Introduction

[1] The appellant, Waata Te Kani, was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment by Judge Gibson in the Auckland District Court on 18 October 2024,1 having pleaded guilty to the following charges:

(a)possessing methamphetamine for supply (x 2);2

(b)kidnapping;3 and

(c)failing to carry out an obligation in relation to a computer search.4

[2]Mr Te Kani now appeals this sentence on the basis that:

(a)the global starting point imposed by the Judge was too high, and the Judge failed to appropriately consider parity with Mr Te Kani’s co-offender for the kidnapping offence;

(b)there should be a totality reduction of two years to the reduced global starting point; and

(c)the discount for Mr Te Kani’s guilty pleas was inadequate.

[3] Mr Te Kani says that these three grounds cumulatively and/or severally resulted in a sentence that was outside the range that could properly be justified by accepted sentencing principles. The respondent opposes the appeal.

Offending

[4] Mr Te Kani’s offending relates to separate events that occurred on 16–17 June 2022 and 2 December 2022.

1      R v Waata Wally Te Kani [2024] NZDC 26342.
2      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1); maximum penalty life imprisonment.
3      Crimes Act 1961, s 209; maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.
4      Search and Surveillance Act 2012, s 178; maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment.

Kidnapping

[5] The kidnapping offending took place on 16–17 June 2022. Judge Gibson described this offending as follows:5

The kidnapping was in the context of a business dispute between a Chinese businessman in Rotorua [Qiang Liu] and the victim, who was also Chinese, over the failure to pay an invoice that was allegedly due to [Mr Liu]. He commissioned, or engaged, [Mr Te Kani] to carry out the kidnapping and so [Mr Te Kani] went from Rotorua with two others and abducted the [victim] from his home in Henderson. He was roughed up, but I accept the violence was not severe, and then told to pay his bill. He was tied up and then he was driven to Rotorua the next day and, eventually, returned to Auckland but left half naked, blindfolded and crying on the side of the road near his home when he was found.

Other offending

[6] Mr Te Kani’s other offending for possessing methamphetamine for supply and failing to carry out an obligation in relation to a computer search occurred on 2 December 2022. On that day, Police executed a search warrant of Mr Te Kani’s vehicle and address.…

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 Te Kani v The King

Details

AGLC: Te Kani v The King [2025] NZHC 423
Case: [2025] NZHC 423
Decision Date: 7 March 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Waata Te Kani was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment by the Auckland District Court for possessing methamphetamine for supply, kidnapping, and failing to carry out an obligation in relation to a computer search. Te Kani appealed his sentence, arguing that the global starting point imposed by the Judge was too high, the Judge failed to appropriately consider parity with his co-offender for the kidnapping offence, there should be a totality reduction of two years to the reduced global starting point, and the discount for his guilty pleas was inadequate. The respondent opposed the appeal. The High Court considered that the starting point for the kidnapping charge needed to be adjusted but that adjustment was netted off against a much smaller totality reduction so that the final starting point was the same. The guilty plea discount given by the Judge was appropriate. There was no error in the end sentence. The appeal against sentence was dismissed.

Orders