Legal Research
Cases
The King v Jesse Marcel Wright

The King v Jesse Marcel Wright

Case [2023] NZHC 2457 1 September 2023

Criminal Liability

Sentencing

Mens Rea & Intention

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE

CRI-2023-083-000209

[2023] NZHC 2457

THE KING

v

JESSE MARCEL WRIGHT

Counsel:
J J Harvey for Crown

J H C Waugh for Mr Wright

Sentencing:

1 September 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF RADICH J

Introduction

[1] Jesse Marcel Wright, you appear for sentence today having pleaded to a charge of attempted murder.1

[2] While a good part of what I am going to say today was included within the sentencing indication that I gave you in July, it is important for this decision to contain a complete record of the basis for my decision. Accordingly, this decision incorporates reasons upon which the sentencing indication was based and, in addition, addresses matters arising subsequently from further submissions that have been made by your lawyer and by the Crown and from the sentencing reports and other information provided to the Court.

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 173 (maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment, offence category 4).

R v WRIGHT [2023] NZHC 2457 [1 September 2023]

[3]In sentencing you today, I am going to explain several things:

(a)the alleged offending;

(b)the starting point I have adopted for an appropriate sentence;

(c)the adjustments I would make to this starting point taking into account your personal circumstances; and

(d)the finite sentence I will impose.

Summary of facts

[4] In pleading guilty, you have agreed with the summary of facts prepared by the Crown. I go on now to outline the nature of your offending as described in that summary.

[5] You had been in a relationship with the victim for about five years. The relationship ended in around December 2022. You have a child with the victim, who was not present at the time of the alleged offending. You are recorded as having been responsible for four previous family violence incidents involving the victim.

[6] You suspected for about a week before the alleged offending that the victim had started a new sexual relationship with another male.

[7] On 7 February 2023 you went to the victim’s house in Springvale, Whanganui and you spent time talking to each other amicably on the couch in the living room. You stayed at the victim’s house overnight.

[8] After your child went to school the next day, you accused the victim of sleeping with someone else. When she turned away to get her phone, you struck her in the back right side of her head, using what is described in the summary of facts as a “cowards punch”. She fell to the ground face first. While she was on the ground, you punched her more than 20 times on the back and top of her head with your fists. You intended to kill the victim. You then dragged the victim off by the scruff of her hoodie into the bedroom in order to get away from her dog.

[9] At that point, you picked up a hammer from a small dresser and struck 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 The King v Jesse Marcel Wright

Details

AGLC: The King v Jesse Marcel Wright [2023] NZHC 2457
Case: [2023] NZHC 2457
Decision Date: 1 September 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jesse Marcel Wright was sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand for the offence of attempted murder. The case involved a severe and premeditated attack on the victim, who was Wright's former partner. The attack included extreme violence, use of a lethal weapon, and multiple assaults on the victim's head, all of which were intended to cause serious harm or death. The court considered various aggravating factors such as the extreme violence, use of a weapon, and the intention to kill, which were present to a significant degree. The starting point for the sentence was set at nine years' imprisonment, reflecting the severity of the offence.

In addition to the starting point, the court considered personal mitigating factors such as Wright's early guilty plea, his previous good character, genuine remorse, and prospects for rehabilitation. A discount of 25% was applied for the guilty plea, 7% for his previous good character, and 10% for his remorse, resulting in a total discount of 42%. The final sentence was calculated to be five years and two months' imprisonment. The court also granted a protection order in favour of the victim under section 123B of the Sentencing Act 2002. Charge 2 was dismissed, and the psychological report was directed to be released to the Department of Corrections and the Parole Board.

Orders