Wilson v Police - [2021] NZHC 402

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2020-409-000189

[2021] NZHC 402

BETWEEN
ISAAC VAUGHN WILSON

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 3 March 2021

Appearances:

T R Nicholls for Appellant

S R D D Bicknell for Respondent

Judgment:

5 March 2021

JUDGMENT OF DUNNINGHAM J

This judgment was delivered by me on 5 March 2021 at 4.00 pm, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar
Date……………

Introduction

[1] The appellant, Isaac Wilson, was sentenced by Judge Couch on 11 December 2020 to 26 months’ imprisonment on eight charges: dishonestly using a motor vehicle, driving while disqualified (twice), refusing the impairment test, possession of utensils (twice) and possession of methamphetamine, failing to stop, and possession of cannabis.1 The appellant appeals that sentence.

1 Police v Wilson [2020] NZDC 26004.

WILSON v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 402 [5 March 2021]

Facts

[2]The charges arise out of three sets of offending.

[3] Four of the charges stemmed from events occurring in the early hours of the morning of 27 August 2020. The appellant was seen by police driving a car which had been stolen 12 days earlier. The appellant failed to stop at a stop sign on a suburban Christchurch street. The police then activated their flashing lights and siren to have the appellant stop, but he failed to do so and accelerated away in excess of the 50 kilometre per hour speed limit.

[4] During the pursuit the appellant drove on the wrong side of the road. He then drove up a driveway where he was confronted by police. Mr Wilson showed signs of impairment and refused to undergo a compulsory impairment test. At that time, the appellant was disqualified from driving. These actions led to charges of driving while disqualified third or subsequent, refusing an impairment test (being his third or subsequent alcohol or drug related driving offence), and failing to stop (being his third or subsequent such offence).

[5] Three further charges arose out of events on 1 September 2020. The appellant was again driving a motor vehicle in a suburban street in Christchurch. When stopped by police, he was searched and found in possession of a methamphetamine pipe and a small amount of cannabis. A further charge of driving while disqualified third or subsequent resulted, as well as a charge of possession of utensils and a charge of possession of cannabis.

[6] The final two charges arose out of events on 11 September 2020. The appellant was in a vehicle but this time as a passenger. The police had reason to search the vehicle and found on him a point bag containing a small amount of methamphetamine. The appellant also had on his person a methamphetamine pipe. This has led to charges of possession of methamphetamine and possession of utensils.

District Court decision

[7] Judge Couch noted the two charges of driving while disqualified were the appellant’s eighth and ninth such convictions for…

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 Wilson 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: [2021] NZHC 402
Decision Date: 5 March 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Wilson v Police, the appellant, Isaac Wilson, appealed his sentence imposed by Judge Couch. The appellant was sentenced to 26 months' imprisonment on eight charges, including dishonestly using a motor vehicle, driving while disqualified, refusing an impairment test, possession of utensils, possession of methamphetamine, failing to stop, and possession of cannabis. The appeal was against the sentence imposed. The appellant argued that the starting point of 12 months' imprisonment for the lead charge was manifestly excessive, the uplift of 18 months for the other driving offences was also excessive, the uplift of 10 per cent for the appellant's previous criminal history should not apply, and the appellant should have received a discount to account for his methamphetamine addiction. The respondent argued that there was no error in the imposition of the sentence. The High Court found that the starting point of 12 months' imprisonment was within range, the uplift of 18 months for the other driving offences was not manifestly excessive, the uplift of 10 per cent for the appellant's previous criminal history was not an error, and it was not an error to refuse to give the appellant a discount for methamphetamine addiction. The appeal was dismissed.

Orders