AThe appeal is allowed.
BThe sentence of two years and one month’s imprisonment imposed by the Judge is vacated. A sentence of 10 months’ home detention is substituted therefore.
CThe sentence of home detention is subject to the standard conditions set out in s 80C(2) of the Sentencing Act 2002 and to the following special conditions imposed under s 80D of the Act:
(i)Mr Williams is to travel directly from the prison at which he is currently being held to the address specified in the Provision of Advice to Courts Report dated 28 May 2021, and there await the arrival of a probation officer and the monitoring company representative.
(ii)Mr Williams is to reside at the address specified in the Provision of Advice to Courts Report dated 28 May 2021 during the term of his sentence, and is not to move to any new residential address without the prior written approval of a probation officer.
(iii)Mr Williams is not to possess, consume or use any alcohol or drugs not prescribed to him.
(iv)Mr Williams is to attend an assessment for any programme or counselling to address his offending as directed by a probation officer, and is to attend and complete such counselling, treatment or programme as is recommended by the assessment and as is directed by and to the satisfaction of a probation officer.
(v)Mr Williams is not to associate with or contact any of his co-offenders without the prior written approval of a probation officer.

DThe standard post-detention conditions under s 80O of the Act are imposed together with the following special post-detention conditions under s 80N:
(i)Mr Williams is to attend an assessment for any programme or counselling to address his offending as directed by a probation officer, and is to attend and complete such counselling, treatment or programme as is recommended by the assessment and as is directed by and to the satisfaction of a probation officer;
(ii)Mr Williams is not to associate with or contact any of his co-offenders without the prior approval of a probation officer.

These conditions are to remain in place for a period of 12 months after the expiry of the sentence of home detention.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Wylie J)

Introduction

On 8 June 2021, the appellant, Rayon Williams, was sentenced to two years and one month’s imprisonment by Jagose J in the High Court at Auckland[1] on two charges – one representative and the other specific – of money laundering.[2]
[1]R v Williams [2021] NZHC 1338.
[2]Crimes Act 1961, s 243(2). Maximum penalty seven years’ imprisonment.
Mr Williams appeals the sentence. He argues that the starting…

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 Williams v R

Details

AGLC: Williams v R [2021] NZCA 333
Case: [2021] NZCA 333
Decision Date: 23 July 2021 at 10.00 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rayon Williams was convicted of money laundering and sentenced to two years and one month’s imprisonment by Jagose J in the High Court at Auckland. Williams appealed his sentence. He argued that the starting point adopted by the Judge was too high and that the Judge intended but omitted to give him a discount for remorse. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal. The Court found that the Judge had failed to allow a discount for remorse and that a sentence of home detention was appropriate. The Court substituted a sentence of 10 months’ home detention for the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Judge. The sentence of home detention is subject to standard and special conditions. The special conditions include a requirement that Williams not associate with or contact any of his co-offenders without the prior written approval of a probation officer.

Orders