Legal Research
Cases
Woodstock v R

Woodstock v R

Case [2020] NZCA 472 5 October 2020

Sentencing

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

Totality of Sentence

Discount for Personal Circumstances

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA144/2020
[2020] NZCA 472

BETWEEN	KIERAN AARON WOODSTOCK Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	24 August 2020
Court:	Gilbert, Thomas and Dunningham JJ
Counsel:	J D Lucas for Appellant M R L Davie for Respondent
Judgment:	5 October 2020 at 9.30 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.
BThe appeal against sentence is allowed.
CThe sentence of six years and six months’ imprisonment on the charge of aggravated robbery is set aside. A sentence of four years and six months’ imprisonment is substituted. This is to be served cumulatively on the sentence of two years and two months’ imprisonment imposed for the 2017 offending. The other sentences imposed in the District Court are confirmed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Gilbert J)

Mr Woodstock pleaded guilty to one charge of aggravated robbery, one charge of burglary, two charges of unlawful possession of a firearm and one charge of failing to carry out obligations in relation to a computer search. This offending took place in late January 2019 (the 2019 offending), about a week after Mr Woodstock’s 23rd birthday.
Mr Woodstock was sentenced by Judge O’Driscoll on 4 February 2020 to six years and six months’ imprisonment for the 2019 offending.[1] This sentence was to be served cumulatively on an existing sentence of two years and two months’ imprisonment that had been imposed on 29 May 2019 on four charges of receiving stolen motor vehicles (the 2017 offending).[2] This offending occurred in June, November and December 2017 when Mr Woodstock was aged 21.
[1]R v Woodstock [2020] NZDC 1915 [Sentencing judgment].
[2]Police v Woodstock [2019] NZDC 10396. This decision was confirmed on appeal in Woodstock v Police [2019] NZHC 2070.
In the result, Mr Woodstock is serving an overall sentence of eight years and eight months’ imprisonment for the totality of this offending. He had not previously been imprisoned.
Mr Woodstock now appeals against his sentence for the 2019 offending. He contends the adjusted starting point adopted for the 2019 offending was too high, a discount for personal circumstances ought to have been allowed, and a greater adjustment should have been made to reflect the totality of the 2019 and 2017 offending given these sentences were to be served cumulatively.
Mr Woodstock filed his appeal 11 working days out of time. The delay was relatively short and there has been no prejudice to the Crown. We accordingly grant the application for an extension of time to appeal.

The facts

Burglary

Sometime after 6 pm on 27 January 2019, Mr Woodstock and three associates drove to the unoccupied address of the victim. They gained entry to the house by breaking the laundry window with a brick and reaching inside to open the door. Once inside, they obtained the keys to a Ford Falcon motor vehicle and a Harley Davidson motorcycle. They took these vehicles away…

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 Woodstock v R

Details

AGLC: Woodstock v R [2020] NZCA 472
Case: [2020] NZCA 472
Decision Date: 5 October 2020 at 9.30 am

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Kieran Aaron Woodstock, appealed against the sentence of six years and six months’ imprisonment imposed on him by the District Court for aggravated robbery and other related offences. The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard the appeal and considered whether the starting point for the aggravated robbery charge was too high, if a discount for personal circumstances should have been allowed, and if a greater adjustment should have been made to reflect the totality of the offending. The Court found that the starting point was within the available range, but a discount for personal circumstances should have been allowed, and a greater adjustment should have been made for totality. The appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the sentence of six years and six months’ imprisonment on the charge of aggravated robbery was set aside, substituting a sentence of four years and six months’ imprisonment to be served cumulatively on the sentence imposed for the 2017 offending. The other sentences imposed in the District Court were confirmed.

The Court of Appeal granted the application for an extension of time to appeal, as the delay in filing the appeal was relatively short, and there had been no prejudice to the Crown. The Court found that the starting point for the aggravated robbery charge was appropriate, but a discount for personal circumstances should have been allowed, considering Woodstock's difficult upbringing, lack of education, and prospects for rehabilitation. The Court also found that a greater adjustment should have been made for totality, as the overall sentence of eight years and eight months' imprisonment for the 2017 and 2019 offending was too long for a young man facing his first custodial sentence. The effective sentence for the totality of the offending was reduced to six years and eight months' imprisonment, with the new sentence of four years and six months' imprisonment for the 2019 offending to be served cumulatively on the 2017 offending sentence.

Orders