Published 02 December 2019
Sentencing — burglary — dishonestly using a document for pecuniary advantage — assaulting a police employee — receiving stolen property — minimum non-parole period — Arahanga v R [2012] NZCA 480, [2013] 1 NZLR 189 — R v Nguyen CA110/01, 2 July 2001 — Lee v Police [2019] NZHC 1172 — Sentencing Act 2002, s 85. The defendant appeared for sentence on four charges of burglary, 16 of dishonestly using a document for pecuniary advantage, one of receiving stolen property and one of assaulting a police employee. He had committed the burglaries to obtain cash, credit cards and other items, and had then used the stolen credit cards to purchase items worth about $1815. He had then spat in the eyes and mouth of a police employee while he was in the cells at the police station. The Court set a start point of three years' imprisonment for the burglaries, and uplifted this by seven months for the rest of the offending. The Court added a further nine-month uplift for previous convictions (58 of burglary alone). With a discount for guilty plea, the final sentence was three years three months' imprisonment. Given the defendant's family circumstances and prospects for rehabilitation, the Court declined to set a minimum non-parole period. Judgment Date: 28 June 2019.
This website explains many of the things you might want to know if you are coming to the Youth Court, or just wondering how the Youth Court works.
Visit website›Ministry of Justice website with information on family issues including about going to court, forms and other times when you may need help.
Visit website›For information about courts and tribunals, including going to court, finding a court & collection of fines and reparation.
Visit website›On this site you will find information about our Supreme Court, Court of Appeal and High Court including recent decisions, daily lists and news.
Visit website›