Williams v Police - [2014] NZHC 2622

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CRI-2014-488-39 [2014] NZHC 2622

BETWEEN
JAYDENE WILLIAMS

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent

Hearing: 21 October 2014

Appearances:

PJ Kaye for Appellant
MB Smith for Respondent

Judgment:

24 October 2014

JUDGMENT OF TOOGOOD

This judgment was delivered by me on 24 October 2014 at 11:00 am
Pursuant to Rule 11.5 High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

WILLIAMS v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2014] NZHC 2622 [24 October 2014]

Introduction

[1] Jaydene Leanne Rewa Williams has appealed against an effective end sentence of two years and four months’ imprisonment imposed upon her by Judge GD Harvey in the District Court at Whangarei on a number of charges of burglary and theft, and charges of escaping from custody, breaching an intensive supervision order and failing to answer bail. Ms Williams has amassed a very long list of previous convictions at the age of 29, and the offending itself was persistent. With his usual candour, Mr Kaye acknowledged that imprisonment was inevitable but the he submits on behalf of the appellant that that the effective term of imprisonment imposed was manifestly excessive.

[2] I have concluded that, in a complicated case, the Judge erred in aspects of his approach to the calculation of the appropriate sentences. I have also decided, however, that although a stern sentence was imposed, it was within the range available to the Judge assessed in accordance with a more conventional approach. I now explain why.

The facts

[3] The offending for which the appellant was sentenced occurred between June 2013 and April 2014. On 15 June 2013, the appellant stole a down jacket valued at $1,900 from Macpac in Hamilton. On 18 November 2013, the appellant entered a residential property after locating a spare key. She took a guitar valued at
$450 and the keys, leaving the property unlocked.

[4] On 9 March 2013, the appellant opened the passenger door of a parked vehicle and took a cell phone valued at $1,000. She appeared in the District Court on 17 March 2014 on the charge of theft from a motor vehicle and also on the November 2013 burglary charge and was remanded on bail subject to a 24-hour curfew. On 31 March 2014, however, the appellant went to the Warehouse in Whangarei and stole over $400 worth of baby clothing. When the Police went to her bail address on 3 April 2014, to arrest her for breach of bail, the appellant broke loose from a Police officer’s hold and ran away.

[5] On 5 April 2013, just two days later, the appellant and an associate gained access to a residential dwelling in Whangarei by forcing the lock on the front door. They removed a range of electronic goods from the property but, while still at the address, were disturbed by one of the residents returning home. The appellant said that they had just arrived at the address but the resident noticed that the front door was open and that the door frame…

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 2622
Decision Date: 24 October 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jaydene Leanne Rewa Williams appealed against the two-year and four-month imprisonment sentence imposed on her by the District Court at Whangarei for various charges, including burglary, theft, escaping from custody, and breaching an intensive supervision order and bail. The appellant, with a history of persistent offending, was sentenced for multiple charges between June 2013 and April 2014. The primary legal issue in this appeal was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive, given the appellant's history of non-compliance with community-based sentences and the seriousness of the crimes.

The High Court examined the approach taken by the sentencing judge and found that while there were some errors in the calculation of the appropriate sentences, the overall sentence was within the range available to the Judge. The Court adopted a more conventional sentencing approach, starting with an appropriate starting point for the lead offence, taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors, and allowing a discount for the guilty plea. The Court concluded that the sentence imposed was stern but not outside the range available to the Judge, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

The Court's reasoning demonstrated that, despite some errors in the sentencing approach, the final sentence was not manifestly excessive. The Court's decision highlights the importance of following a more conventional and transparent sentencing approach, taking into account the totality of offending, while also considering the appellant's remorse, intention to rehabilitate, and the impact of the crimes on the victims.

Orders