R v Perkins [2017] NZDC 522 (16 January 2017)

Last Updated: 6 April 2017

EDITORIAL NOTE: NAMES AND/OR DETAILS IN THIS JUDGMENT HAVE BEEN ANONYMISED.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT HAMILTON

CRI-2016-019-005381 [2017] NZDC 522

THE QUEEN

v

_{RYAN PERKINS}

Hearing:	16 January 2017
Appearances:	S Gilbert for the Crown S Green for the Defendant
Judgment:	16 January 2017

_{NOTES OF JUDGE D C CLARK ON SENTENCING}

[1] Mr Perkins you appear today for sentence in respect of three charges. The most serious is wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and then in respect of a second incident you were found on a property without reasonable excuse and also there is an instance of wilful damage.

[2] The most significant matter relates to an incident on 29 August last year. On that evening you had been at a friend’s home. You had been drinking and the victim, who is your mother, was at home and that is the address that both you and she lived at.

[3] At about midnight you arrived back. The victim woke up because she heard some noise in the garage. She approached you and asked you if you had been drinking which you denied. She then went to pick up the landline but found that that

_{had been cut off. Now at that time you approached her and punched her twice in the}

R v RYAN PERKINS [2017] NZDC 522 [16 January 2017]

left side of her face and once in the right side and that caused bleeding from her head area. She tried to get away from you and get out of the address via the sitting room. You followed closely behind and punched her again. That blow caused her to fall against a coffee table and hit her head. She was screaming out in pain at that stage and asked for help. What you did was pick her up, carry her to the bedroom where you are described as having dumped her on top of the bed but did not take any further action after that. You left and you were found in a property that you had no connection with in the laundry area. When the police came you became upset and you kicked out and caused some damage to the door to the laundry. The victim, your mother, was able to activate a personal medical alarm and that was how emergency services came to be involved.

[4] Your mother was admitted to hospital where she remained for some time (about six weeks) and from the information I have the initial injuries included bruising to her face and upper body. Her pelvis was also fractured in several places.

[5] In respect of the damage caused both to the window at your mother’s home address and the other property, reparation is sought. Given that you will be serving a lengthy sentence of imprisonment, while reparation is properly asked for, you are not in a position practically to make that reparation and I do not make an order for reparation.

[6] I have an updated victim impact statement in respect of your mother and that tells me a bit more about how things are now and what is clear is as well as spending six weeks in hospital your mother’s mobility has been significantly affected by this incident and that has meant that she largely uses a walking frame or a walking stick whereas before she describes being able to walk unaided.

[7] I have heard from counsel today about how your circumstances should be looked at in terms of the appropriate length of prison sentence. Ms Green I think has quite candidly outlined your personal circumstances. You have had a long time challenge with addiction in respect of alcohol and other drugs and that remains completely problematic for you. Ms Green said it is difficult to assess you for rehabilitation purposes except after you have been often incarcerated for a period of

time to give you an opportunity to be alcohol or drug free. She also referred to the fact that you have some mental health issues as a result of those addictions. She acknowledges that there are features about your behaviour that make your position worse. They are the things which sentence length is worked out having regard to. In particular the aggravating features of your behaviour are that there were attacks to your mother’s head but the significant aggravating feature in my view is her vulnerability. She was 89. You knew her vulnerabilities and despite that you behaved in the way that you did. The impact of your behaviour resulted in serious injury and that is the other significant aggravating factor. Because of those

aggravating factors you fall into band 2 of R v Taueki 1 and what that means is the

starting point for imprisonment is five years. The range is five to 10 years’

imprisonment.

[8] Ms Green’s submission is that a starting point of six years would be appropriate for your behaviour and while she also acknowledges that you have got quite a terrible list of prior convictions she asks that six years be the starting point for sentence then give you credit for an early guilty plea as well as some credit for your health issues and remorse. In respect of remorse she said that you are sorry for what has happened I think and ashamed and you are remorseful. Her submission is that you did not remember what had taken place at that time.

[9] The Crown position is that the starting point is slightly higher than that which Ms Green suggests and that the aggravating features mean that a term of imprisonment of about seven years is the appropriate starting point with some reflection of some relevant previous convictions and those relevant previous convictions in particular are those that relate to your mother and there are also a few other violence convictions. The Crown say that that could be dealt with by way of a small uplift of perhaps two months and again acknowledging that you should get a credit for your early guilty plea.

[10] In terms of credit for your health issues and remorse to a certain extent the

_{Crown say that that needs to be looked at closely because to a certain extent your}

1 R v Taueki [2005] NZCA 174; [2005] 3 NZLR 372 (CA)

health issues have been impacted by your addictions and you have to be held accountable for those things.

[11] I have looked at your circumstances and my view of matters is this. I agree that those aggravating features are appropriate today and in particular I have focussed on two, the vulnerability of the victim your mother and the injuries sustained as well as attacks to the head but it is those first two which are the most significant.

[12] My view of matters is this, that you certainly fall within band 2 of R v Taueki and I consider that a sentence of around seven years is appropriate as a starting point but that includes a small uplift for previous convictions so in terms of a starting point I think that six years 10 months and two months for an uplift is appropriate. I give you a full credit for pleading guilty, so that is 25 percent off. Now that would take you to a term of imprisonment of around five years and three months.

[13] I am going to give you a credit for how you feel about this and some other issues but it is a credit of three months restricted to that and my view is that the appropriate term that reflects all of those matters is a term of five years’ imprisonment. I am hopeful that given the significant incident on this occasion that that might also be a factor in you being able to make a renewed effort to address addictions. That is not easy and that is clear from the history here that you have been challenged for a long time by substance abuse. You have support. You have supporters in Court and again I hope that when you are back in the community that you can make or be able to sustain some positive change.

[14] For today’s purposes, however, that completes the matter apart from one other matter. I need to consider whether a minimum term of imprisonment is required. Given the information I have and it is not specifically sought by the Crown I do not consider that a minimum term of imprisonment is required. You will be able to go before the Parole Board and the Parole Board will be able to assess, given the progress that has been made while you are in prison, what the appropriate release date will be for you.

[15] A protection order was asked for by your mother, that is not objected to by you and I make a protection order pursuant to s 123B.

D C Clark

District Court Judge