Police v Blyth DC Whangarei CRI-2012-088-2140 [2012] NZDC 1495 (14 September 2012)

Last Updated: 30 September 2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WHANGAREI

_{CRI-2012-088-002140}

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Informant

v

COREY JAMES BLYTH

Defendant

Hearing: 14 September 2012

Appearances: Sergeant G Lane for the Informant

T Donald for the Defendant

Judgment: 14 September 2012

_{NOTES OF JUDGE DUNCAN G HARVEY ON SENTENCING}

[1] Corey James Blyth, you are for sentence today on one charge of theft from a motor car, unlawfully in an enclosed yard, driving with excess breath alcohol, reckless driving, dangerous driving, failing to stop, failing to remain stopped, driving whilst forbidden, sustained loss of traction and wilful damage.

[2] The facts that I sentence you on are that on 4 May you were drinking with friends at the Ruawai Wharf. Together with your friends you headed off the wharf to go to the Ruawai Hotel. While intoxicated and at some point during the night, you went into the named victim’s property on Fryberg Road. You then entered a utility which was parked in the drive and you stole a cellphone and wallet that belonged to

_{the victim. I am told that a cellphone was recovered from one of your friends.}

POLICE V BLYTH DC WHA CRI-2012-088-002140 [14 September 2012]

[3] In relation to the driving matters, on 24 June you were driving a Holden Commodore vehicle and you were seen at the intersection of Kaiwaka-Mangawhai Road and State Highway 1, Kaiwaka. You were observed operating that vehicle in a long continuous sustained loss of traction outside the Kaiwaka War Memorial Hall, which at the time was being used for a 21st birthday party. You then sped off in a northerly direction. You evaded a police patrol.

[4] Within five minutes you were again observed travelling south on State Highway 1 past a compulsory breath testing check point. You were travelling at excessive speed. You passed two other southbound vehicles by driving on the flush median around a moderate right-hand bend. That stretch of road is governed by a 50 kilometre speed limit.

[5] At about 1.25 you returned to the compulsory breath testing check point in the same vehicle, this time from a southerly direction, and you were directed to pull to the side of the road by an enforcement officer. You started to comply initially by moving to the left of the roadway, but then you sped off in a rapid display of acceleration, again in a northerly direction on State Highway 1. A pursuit was initiated. Speeds reached 140 kilometres an hour.

[6] Upon reaching the northbound passing lanes, you crossed the centre-line completely into the opposing lane, at speed, and you did that on a slight right-hand corner. Not long after that you lost control of your vehicle, you spun it around and you crashed into a barrier on the left-hand side of the roadway, puncturing the right front tyre. You continued north on three tyres with speeds up to 80 kilometres an hour. You were still being followed by the marked patrol car displaying red and blue flashing lights and siren. The distance of the pursuit on State Highway 1 was five kilometres.

[7] You then turned right into Baldrock Road and you continued for a further 1.2 kilometres before you stopped. There was a struggle and finally it was possible to subdue you. It was necessary to use pepper spray and handcuffs. While you were travelling on Baldrock Road you stopped your vehicle three times before accelerating away from the patrol vehicle. Twice you allowed the constable to

approach the driver’s side window before spinning your wheels, causing her to jump

out of the way.

[8] Once you were apprehended you displayed signs of recent alcohol consumption. Breath testing procedures were initiated; the subsequent result was

933 micrograms of alcohol per litre of breath. Subsequent checks reveal that you have never held a New Zealand driver’s licence and you had previously been forbidden to drive on 5 October 2010.

[9] You were placed in the rear of the patrol vehicle but you continued to struggle and kick out at the officer and in the process you damaged the plastic trim on the door of the police vehicle and reparation in the sum of $88.40 is sought as a result of that.

[10] Checks on your vehicle found it to be an extremely unsafe car. It had four tyres so bald that the exposed steel belting was detaching from the tyres. The vehicle was unlicensed and the warrant of fitness had expired.

[11] By your own admission you had not been wearing a seat belt at the time of the pursuit, and in fact you received some superficial injury from the earlier collision with the roadside barrier. Your explanation was that you had run because your mate in the vehicle was wanted and had warrants for his arrest. So far as the officer could ascertain you showed no emotion or care in relation to how dangerous your driving had been. Your main concern was about your vehicle being impounded.

[12] In preparing for sentencing I have had the advantage of reading the pre-sentence report. I have listened to the submissions that have been made to me by Ms Donald this morning. I have read the victim impact statements.

[13] When sentencing I have to have regard to the purposes and the principles of sentencing. You have to be held accountable for this offending and there is a need for me to try and promote in you a sense of responsibility for what you have done. There is a real need for me to make it very clear that this sort of behaviour cannot be tolerated. Because of the number of accidents that are caused by young men who do

not stop when the police ask them to stop, there is a need for me to impose a sentence that is truly deterrent.

[14] I have to have regard to the seriousness of the offences. These driving offences are among the most serious I have seen for some time. There you were driving an unregistered, unwarranted motor vehicle, bald tyres, in a pursuit reaching speeds of 140 kilometres an hour on the open road. If you want to commit suicide that is your business, but don’t you dare take a risk with other road user’s lives, and that is what you were doing. You were grossly intoxicated and it is just a miracle that there was not a tragedy.

[15] I have to be consistent. I have to treat you in the way that other people are treated for like offending. I have been heard to say in this area on more than one occasion that young men who drive like this and who go on to commit offences whilst refusing to stop can expect to go to prison. I accept what Ms Donald tells me that I must impose the least restrictive outcome that I can. The recommendation in the pre-sentence report simply does not meet the purposes and principles of sentencing.

[16] You appeared before me in the Dargaville District Court on a breach of bail. At that stage I think you were still 17. I said then that I had a real reluctance to remand a young man in custody but your behaviour simply gave me no choice. I was extremely concerned that if I granted you bail you would have got behind the wheel of a car again and then you could easily have killed somebody. Imprisonment is the only possible starting point here.

[17] However, you are young. You have spent getting on towards three weeks in custody. You have never been to prison before. I am told that it has been a salutary experience for you. I sincerely hope that we never see you again. Because of your age, and only because of your age, and because you entered pleas of guilty at the very first opportunity, I am going to step back from imprisonment.

[18] I am going to impose sentences of home detention and I am going to impose post-detention conditions. Now I appreciate that that may mean that you cannot

work; that is the consequence of your behaviour. If I had sent you to prison you could not have worked either. This way at least, I can be sure that something will be done about what is a very severe alcohol problem. Had I been sending you to prison it is likely, after giving you credit for pleas of guilty, I would have cumulated various sentences and would have ended up with a term of imprisonment of around seven to eight months. There is no mathematical way of converting imprisonment terms to home detention. So the way I am going to deal with you is as follows.

[19] Dealing first with the charges for the incident on 4 May, that is unlawfully in the enclosed yard and the theft of the wallet and cellphone. On those charges you are now convicted, you are sentenced to home detention for one month on the conditions set out in the report. I am going to go through those conditions with you in detail at the end. You will also be subject to six months post-detention conditions, again I will explain those. In relation to the theft of a cellphone you are likewise convicted and sentenced to one month’s home detention. You are to pay the reparation of $197.

[20] Turning then to the driving incident. I am going to take as the lead or the most serious charge the driving with excess breath alcohol, but I am going to factor into that sentence all the other driving matters. On that charge you are now convicted and you are sentenced to three months’ home detention and that is cumulative on the one month. The same conditions and post-detention conditions will apply. On that charge you are also disqualified from driving for one year and nine months and that commences today.

[21] In relation to the charge of intentional damage of the police vehicle and taking into account the way that you behaved upon your apprehension, you are convicted and you are sentenced to one month’s home detention and that is also cumulative. The same conditions and post-detention conditions apply. You are to pay reparation of $88.40.

[22] All the other sentences that I am now about to impose, with the exception of one period of disqualification are concurrent. On the charge of sustained loss of traction, convicted, two months’ home detention, disqualified from driving for six

months from today. On the charge of reckless driving, convicted, three months’ home detention. On the charge of dangerous driving, convicted, three months’ home detention. On the charge of failing to remain stopped, that is a fine-only matter, you are convicted and discharged. On the charge of failing to stop when signalled to do so, you are convicted and you are disqualified from driving for three months and that commences on 13 June 2014. In relation to the charge of driving whilst forbidden that is also a fine-only matter, you are convicted and discharged.

[23] The sentence of home detention will be on the following conditions:

(a) After receiving all the necessary paperwork from this Court you are to travel directly to your Ruawai address. You are not to make any unnecessary stops on the way. Once at home you are to stay there. You are to await the arrival of the probation officer and the security officer. You are to reside at that address and you are not to move without the prior written approval of the probation officer.

(b) You are not to possess or consume alcohol and/or illicit drugs for the duration of home detention.

(c) You are to complete and participate in an alcohol and drug education programme to the satisfaction of the facilitator and probation officer.

(d) You are to complete and participate in any other such counselling and/or treatment designed to reduce your risk of reoffending.

[24] There will be post-detention conditions that will last for six months after the expiry of the sentence:

(a) You are to complete and participate in any other counselling or treatment as directed and that may include revisiting previously attended programmes.

(b) You are not to possess or consume alcohol and/or illicit drugs until you are no longer subject to the post-detention conditions and you will continue to reside at that address.

[25] Mr Blyth, there are certainly a number of people in our community who are of the view that home detention is a soft option. I think you are going to find it is not. But I want to give you a very clear warning. If you breach the terms of this sentence and certainly if you appear in front of me, what you will be facing is not only a charge of breach of home detention, but there will also be an application for you to be re-sentenced on the matters that I have dealt with this morning. As I say, if you are to appear in front of me in that situation I will send you to prison; it is as simple as that.

Duncan G Harvey

District Court Judge