Williams v The King - [2024] NZHC 593

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WAIHŌPAI ROHE

CRI-2024-425-002

[2024] NZHC 593

BETWEEN
JONATHAN REX WILLIAMS

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 18 March 2024

Appearances:

J A T Ross for Appellant

M B Brownlie for Respondent

Judgment:

18 March 2024

ORAL JUDGMENT OF EATON J

(appeal against sentence)

This judgment was delivered by me on …….. at ……… pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:

WILLIAMS v R [2024] NZHC 593 [18 March 2024]

Introduction

[1] Jonathan Williams was sentenced to two years seven months’ imprisonment by Judge Harvey on 6 December 2023 following guilty pleas to charges of:1

(a)unlawfully possessing firearm (representative);2

(b)unlawfully possessing firearm (x2);3

(c)unlawfully possessing ammunition (representative x3);4

(d)unlicensed possession of ammunition (x2);5

(e)driving while suspended;6 and

(f)driving while forbidden (x9).7

[2] Mr Williams appeals against sentence. He says the District Court Judge failed to provide a discount to recognise the impact of parental incarceration and miscalculated the end sentence. The miscalculation is not contested on appeal.

Facts

[3] At about 3:00 pm on 20 January 2022, Mr Williams and a co-defendant were stopped by police whilst driving in Invercargill. Police impounded the vehicle due to it being involved in a fleeing driver incident on 11 January 2022. A patched Nomad vest was visible in the rear seat behind Mr Williams and underneath the vest was an archery bow. The vehicle was searched and the police located various firearms and rounds of ammunition as well as a methamphetamine pipe, scales and empty point bags. A cut off piece of gun barrel was found inside Mr Williams bag.

1      R v Williams [2023] NZDC 27226.
2      Arms Act 1983, s 45(1) – maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment, $5000 fine.
3      Section 45(1) – maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment, $5000 fine.
4      Section 45(1) – maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment, $5000 fine.
5      Section 22B – maximum penalty $10,000 fine.
6      Land Transport Act 1998, ss 32(1)(c) & 32(3) – maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment,
$4500 fine.
7      Section 52(1)(c) – maximum penalty $10,000 fine.

[4] On 7 July 2022, Mr Williams was served a driver licence suspension notice due to excess demerit points.

[5] On 17 August 2022, police located a vehicle that had previously been involved in a fleeing driver incident and was wanted for impound. Within the vehicle, police located a shotgun round. A warrantless search was invoked. Police located a red container with 24 yellow shotgun rounds, black Nomad t-shirts and Mr Williams’ driver’s licence. In the boot of the vehicle were various rounds of ammunition, two smart phones, a glass pipe and a BB gun.

[6] On 9 September 2022, Mr Williams was the driver of an unlawfully taken vehicle. He was arrested. When police recovered the car, they located many rounds of ammunition and an ammunition belt wrapped in t-shirts displaying the Nomads insignia.

[7] On 5 November 2022, the appellant was driving when stopped by police.…

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 The King

Details

AGLC: Williams v The King [2024] NZHC 593
Case: [2024] NZHC 593
Decision Date: 18 March 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Jonathan Rex Williams appeals against his sentence of two years and seven months' imprisonment for charges including unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition, and driving while suspended and forbidden. The District Court Judge imposed the sentence, but Williams argues the sentence was excessive due to an arithmetical error and that a discount should have been given for the impact of his incarceration on his children.

The court identified two key issues: whether the sentence was mathematically correct and whether a discount should have been applied for the impact of parental incarceration. The court confirmed that mathematical errors, even if the sentence is within the range, must be corrected to avoid injustice. The court also examined whether the District Court should have applied a discount for the impact of incarceration on Williams' children, considering factors such as the strength of the parent-child relationship and the seriousness of the offending. Despite Williams' arguments, the court found that a discount was not warranted given the seriousness of the offending and the lack of remorse shown by Williams.

The court upheld the appeal to correct the mathematical error, reducing the sentence to two years and four months' imprisonment. The court did not allow the discount for the impact on children, as it found the seriousness of the offending and the lack of remorse outweighed this consideration.

Orders