Legal Research
Cases
Te Wheoro v The the Queen

Te Wheoro v The the Queen

Case [2022] NZHC 1234 1 June 2022

Sentencing

Manifestly Excessive Sentence

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2022-463-000046 [2022] NZHC 1234

BETWEEN
TIAKE KAIKOHE TE WHEORO

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Hearing: 25 May 2022

Counsel:

W T Nabney for Appellant D P Coulson for Respondent

Judgment:

1 June 2022

JUDGMENT OF DOWNS J

This judgment was delivered by me on Wednesday, 1 June 2022 at 2.15 pm.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors/Counsel:
Crown Solicitor, Tauranga. W T Nabney, Tauranga.

TE WHEORO v R [2022] NZHC 1234 [1 June 2022]

The appeal

[1] Tiake Te Wheoro appeals a 27-month prison sentence for unrelated episodes of violence.1 An appeal in this context must be allowed if there is an error in the sentence and a different one should be imposed; in short, if the sentence is manifestly excessive.2

Background

[2]For ease of reference, I address the offending as episodes A, B and C.

A

[3] On 18 June 2021, Mr Te Wheoro kicked to the face a female friend of his partner. The victim was bending over. Mr Te Wheoro then headbutted the victim, again to the face. The victim suffered “splits to her nose and cuts to her mouth and lips”.3 She also suffered a chipped tooth. Mr Te Wheoro told Police he did not assault the victim and she fell down the stairs.

[4] A charge of injuring with intent to injure was laid 22 July 2021. On 17 March 2022, the Crown amended the charge to a lesser one of assault with intent to injure on the assumption Mr Te Wheoro would plead guilty.4 Mr Te Wheoro did so 25 March 2022.

B

[5] On 25 June 2021, Mr Te Wheoro arrived home drunk and verbally abused his partner. She ran onto the deck and telephoned her father. Mr Te Wheoro followed, grabbed the victim by the throat and applied pressure to her windpipe. She struggled to breathe but managed to get away. The victim called to a neighbour for help. The neighbour called Police. When they arrived, Mr Te Wheoro threatened to “cripple” one of the officers and said he was a trained fighter. He remained silent on arrest.

1      Police v Te Wheoro [2022] NZDC 6234.
2      Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 250 and Tutakangahau v R [2014] NZCA 279.
3      Summary of facts.
4      Crimes Act 1961, s 193; maximum penalty, three years’ imprisonment.

[6] Charges of strangulation, breach of a protection order, and threatening behaviour were laid 26 June 2021, that is, the day after the offending. On 26 January 2022, the day of his trial in relation to B, Mr Te Wheoro pleaded guilty to a substituted charge of assault on a person in a family relationship, and charges of breach of a protection order and threatening behaviour.5

C

[7]On 22 November 2021, Mr Te Wheoro confronted his mother after he noticed

$5,000 missing from his bedroom drawer. She attempted to close a door between them. Mr Te Wheoro pushed it open, causing…

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 Wheoro v The the Queen

Details

AGLC: Te Wheoro v The the Queen [2022] NZHC 1234
Case: [2022] NZHC 1234
Decision Date: 1 June 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Tiake Kaikohe Te Wheoro appealed a 27-month prison sentence for multiple unrelated violent incidents. The court was required to determine if the sentence was manifestly excessive. The appeal hinged on whether the starting point and increases for each incident were appropriate, and if a cultural report submitted after sentencing could be considered as fresh evidence.

The starting point for the first incident, where Te Wheoro assaulted a woman, was argued to be 12 months instead of 14 months. The court compared this case with others where similar violence resulted in a 12-month starting point. However, the increase for the second incident, where Te Wheoro threatened a police officer, was upheld as appropriate due to the seriousness of violence against a police officer in the execution of duty. The six-month uplift to the global starting point was also deemed justified due to Te Wheoro's history of similar offences and breaching a protection order. The cultural report, submitted late and without prior notice, was declined as fresh evidence due to its lack of cogency and failure to materially add to the information before the court.

Despite the argument that Te Wheoro's background warranted a greater discount, the court found the sentence was not manifestly excessive considering the nature and frequency of the offences, including those committed while on bail and in breach of a protection order. The appeal was dismissed.

The court's final orders maintained the 27-month prison sentence as appropriate, given the circumstances and the need for denunciation, deterrence, and public protection.

Orders