Williams v Police - [2014] NZHC 3255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

CRI 2014-425-39 [2014] NZHC 3255

BETWEEN
EDDIE MALCOLM WILLIAMS

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 16 December 2014 via AVL

Appearances:

H Cuthill for the Appellant
E Higbee for the Respondent

Judgment:

16 December 2014

ORAL JUDGMENT OF MALLON J

Introduction

[1] Mr Williams pleaded guilty to and was convicted on one charge of breaching a protection order1 and one charge of male assaults female.2 He was sentenced in the District Court at Invercargill to 12 months imprisonment.3 He appeals against his sentence on the ground that it is manifestly excessive.

The offending

[2] On 31 January 2012 a protection order was issued against Mr Williams in respect of the victim.

[3] On 16 July 2014 Mr Williams was drinking at an associate’s address. The victim arrived and was also intoxicated. An argument developed between them and
Mr Williams punched the victim in the mouth. This caused a cut to her lower lip and

1      Domestic Violence Act 1995, ss 19 and 49(1)(a) and (3) (maximum penalty of three years imprisonment).
2      Crimes Act 1961, s 194(b) (maximum penalty of two years imprisonment).
3      Police v Williams DC Invercargill CRI-2014-025-1610, 23 October 2014.

WILLIAMS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2014] NZHC 3255 [16 December 2014]

bruising on her jaw. She subsequently left the address and was taken to hospital. She received six stitches to her lip.

[4] Mr Williams was later located at the victim’s address. He denied assaulting her and said he suspected that she had fallen off her bike.

Personal circumstances

[5] Mr Williams was 36 years old at the time of the offending. He has an extensive criminal history with over 90 convictions, including Youth Court matters, for a range of offending committed between 1993 and 2014. For present purposes the most relevant offending is:

(a) Four breaches of a protection order (three breaches in respect of this same victim between 2013 and 2014, and one in respect of a different victim in 2013). He was sentenced to terms of imprisonment of between one month and two months and one week for these breaches.

(b)Three convictions for violence committed in 2009, 2010, and 2011 in respect of the same victim (being a threat to kill, male assaults female and assault with intent to injure). The most serious of these was the assault with intent to injure, committed in 2009, for which he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of nine months, with shorter terms of imprisonment for the other offences.

(c) One conviction for male assaults female committed in 2011 against a different victim for which he was sentenced to four months imprisonment.

[6] The pre-sentence report was not a positive one. Mr Williams told the report- writer that he was not a violent person and that, in the right circumstances, breaking someone’s jaw would not be a big deal. He denied causing the injuries to the victim and said that he had pleaded guilty because he…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Williams v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2014] NZHC 3255
Decision Date: 16 December 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Eddie Malcolm Williams was convicted and sentenced in the District Court to 12 months imprisonment for breaching a protection order and for male assaults female. Williams appealed against his sentence on the ground that it was manifestly excessive. The High Court allowed the appeal and reduced the sentence to eight months imprisonment.

The court considered the legal issues regarding the appropriate starting point for the sentence, the appropriate uplift for Williams' criminal history, and whether the overall sentence was manifestly excessive. The District Court had adopted a starting point of 12 months for the protection order breach, which the High Court found to be too high. The High Court considered that a starting point of seven months was more appropriate given the circumstances of the single incident, which involved limited violence. The High Court found that a three month uplift for Williams' criminal history, on top of a seven month starting point, was not excessive and warranted a stern response.

The court allowed the appeal and substituted a sentence of eight months imprisonment for the protection order breach, with the special and standard conditions remaining. The concurrent six month sentence for the male assaults female charge remained in place.

Orders