Wadman v Police - [2025] NZHC 300

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2024-488-000130 [2025] NZHC 300

BETWEEN
OLIVIA GEORGETTE WADMAN

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 25 February 2025

Appearances:

T Shepherd for Appellant A Goodwin for Crown

Judgment:

26 February 2025

JUDGMENT OF ANDERSON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 26 February 2025 at 4.00 pm.

……………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:
Marsden Woods Inskip Smith, Whangarei

WADMAN v POLICE [2025] NZHC 300 [26 February 2025]

[1] On the evening of 25 April 2024, Ms Olivia Wadman was driving in Kaitaia when Police stopped her at a roadside checkpoint. She returned a positive breath test of 451 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath.1 Ms Wadman deposed that she had consumed three beers over a period of around three hours. She was on her way to a local supermarket because she had run out of nappies for her youngest child.

[2] At the first opportunity, on 17 May 2024, Ms Wadman pleaded guilty in the Kaitaia District Court to one charge of driving with excess breath alcohol.2 Subsequently, on 21 November 2024, Judge M Howard-Sager declined Ms Wadman’s application for a discharge without conviction.3 Ms Wadman appeals.

[3] At the time of the offending, Ms Wadman was 28 years old and working as a registered nurse at the Kaitaia Hospital Emergency Department. She has postgraduate qualifications in nursing and business administration, and an impressive academic transcript. By the time of her application for discharge Ms Wadman had recently moved to Queensland.

Additional information on appeal

[4] In an affidavit sworn on 19 November 2024 in support of her application in the District Court, Ms Wadman deposed that she had “accepted a casual employment position as a registered nurse in the Yeppoon Emergency Department and a permanent contract in Rockhampton Emergency Department.” She annexed two “Approvals to offer employment” with the Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service for these roles.

[5] The Yeppoon offer for a casual position describes the hours “As Required” commencing 30 October 2024. The Rockhampton offer is dated 11 November 2024. It is for a “Permanent Part Time” position, 48 hours per fortnight, commencing 25 November 2024. The Rockhampton offer annexed the Queensland Health General Terms and Conditions of Employment.

1      This result exceeded the legal limit of 250 micrograms.
2      Land Transport Act 1998, s 56. The maximum penalty is three months' imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $4,500.
3      NZ Police v Wadman [2024] NZDC 28265.

[6] The Rockhampton offer was incomplete in the affidavit filed in the District Court. Unopposed, I granted leave to Ms Wadman to file a further affidavit annexing the missing pages. This affidavit also provided some narrative about Ms Wadman’s employment and visa position.

Legal principles

[7] The Court must not discharge an offender without conviction under s 106 of the Sentencing Act 2002 “unless the court is satisfied that the direct and indirect consequences of a conviction would be out of all…

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 Wadman v Police

Details

AGLC: Wadman v Police [2025] NZHC 300
Case: [2025] NZHC 300
Decision Date: 26 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Olivia Georgette Wadman appealed against the Kaitaia District Court's refusal to grant her a discharge without conviction for driving with excess breath alcohol. On the evening of 25 April 2024, Ms Wadman was stopped by Police at a checkpoint in Kaitaia, and returned a breath test result of 451 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. On 17 May 2024, Ms Wadman pleaded guilty to the charge. However, on 21 November 2024, Judge M Howard-Sager declined Ms Wadman’s application for a discharge without conviction. Ms Wadman appealed to the High Court.

The legal issues in this case were whether the District Court erred in its assessment of the direct and indirect consequences of Ms Wadman's conviction and whether the omission of pages from Ms Wadman's affidavit led to a miscarriage of justice.

The High Court found that the District Court did not err in its assessment of the direct and indirect consequences of Ms Wadman's conviction. The Court concluded that the Judge did not make factual errors in describing Ms Wadman's employment situation. The Judge's assessment that Ms Wadman was a "valued employee" was a stretch, but it did not affect the Judge's decision. The Court also found that the omission of pages from Ms Wadman's affidavit did not lead to a miscarriage of justice. The Court concluded that Ms Wadman had not established an appreciable risk of consequences that would outweigh the low gravity of offending. The appeal was dismissed.

The final orders of the Court were that the appeal be dismissed, and the decision of the District Court be affirmed.

Orders