R v Caine [2014] NZHC 2330 (26 September 2014)

Last Updated: 11 November 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

CRI-2013-019-003032 [2014] NZHC 2330

THE QUEEN

v

_{STEPHEN ROBERT CAINE}

Counsel:	R G Douch for Crown P J A Buckle for Prisoner
Sentence:	26 September 2014

_{NOTES ON SENTENCE OF COLLINS J}

Introduction

[1] Mr Caine, you appear for sentencing having pleaded guilty to a charge of wounding with reckless disregard for the safety of others.¹ You entered your plea after I gave you a sentence indication on 19 May 2014.

[2] I advise you from the outset that I am going to be sentencing you to home detention.

[3] In explaining your sentence, I shall: (1) Summarise your offending.

_{(2) Set out the starting point for your sentence.}

¹ _{Crimes Act 1961, s 188(2).}

R v CAINE [2014] NZHC 2330 [26 September 2014]

(3) Set out the adjustments I will make to the starting point of your sentence.

(4) Set out the sentence that I am imposing.

Your offending

[4] On 5 June 2013 you and friends had been drinking at your place in Coromandel. In the early evening Mr Somers, a long-term friend came to your home. He also had been consuming alcohol.

[5] It was intended that Mr Somers would cook a meal for you, himself and your daughter, Siobhan. Mr Somers left to go and purchase some food.

[6] When Mr Somers returned a dispute broke out between the two of you. It

culminated in you taking a bread knife and cutting Mr Somers’ neck.

[7] The wound inflicted to Mr Somers was not in itself life threatening but Mr Somers did require extensive medical care and attention at Waikato Hospital where he was kept for approximately two days.

[8] You admitted your wrongdoing to Senior Constable Morrissey when he spoke to you in Coromandel the next morning.

The starting point

[9] I am adopting a starting point of two years and four months’ imprisonment. This starting point appropriately reflects your culpability and is consistent with recent High Court decisions.²

[10] In referring to comparable cases I emphasise that each case has to be assessed on its own merits. Rarely are two cases identical.

² Hepi v Police [2013] NZHC 2690; Dixon v Police HC Tauranga CRI-2011-470-24, 5 October

2011 and Swan v Police [2014] NZHC 69.

Adjustments

[11] Your previous convictions are not significant or particularly relevant. Your last offending was 20 years ago. I place your previous convictions to one side when considering the sentence that should be imposed upon you today.

[12] I am willing to give you a discount to reflect your guilty plea and to some degree the remorse that you have demonstrated.

[13] I will deduct five months from the starting point to reflect your guilty plea.

[14] I will deduct a further one month imprisonment to reflect your remorse and the efforts that you have taken to address your underlying alcohol problems.

[15] This produces a provisional sentence of 22 months’ imprisonment.

Home detention

[16] I have previously indicated that if the reports proved home detention was suitable then I would consider imposing a sentence of home detention. It now appears that a suitable address has been located for you to serve a sentence of home detention. I am satisfied your offending and your personal circumstances are such

that the most appropriate sentence for you is one of home detention.³

[17] In assessing the length of the sentence of home detention which should be imposed, I have undertaken an evaluative exercise. Home detention sentences are not derived at by a simple mathematical equation, but instead are to be fixed after taking an overall assessment of all factors relevant to the offender and having regard to the purposes and principles of the Sentencing Act 2002.⁴

[18] In my assessment, the appropriate length of your home detention should be nine months.

³ _{Sentencing Act 2002, s 15A.}

⁴ R v Bisschop [2008] NZCA 229 at [18] and R v Burns [2014] NZHC 2278.

[19] Before imposing this sentence on you I have reflected on whether or not a sentence of nine months’ home detention would serve the purposes and principles set out in the Sentencing Act.

[20] In my assessment, a sentence of nine months’ home detention would:

(1) hold you accountable for the harm done to Mr Somers and the community;⁵

(2) promote in you a sense of responsibility for the harm you have done;⁶

(3) denounce your conduct;⁷

(4) deter you and others from committing the same or similar offences;⁸

and

(5) be the least restrictive outcome that is appropriate in the circumstances of your case.⁹

Conclusion

[21] Mr Caine, can you please stand.

[22] I am sentencing you to nine months’ home detention in relation to the charge

of wounding with reckless disregard for the safety of others.

[23] You will serve this sentence of home detention at 21 Pringle Place, Nawton, Hamilton.

[24] You will travel directly to that address from this Court and await the arrival of the monitoring company representative and a probation officer.

⁵ _{Sentencing Act 2002, s 7(1)(a).}

⁶ _{Section 7(1)(b).}

⁷ _{Section 7(1)(e).}

⁸ _{Section 7(1)(f).}

⁹ Section 8(g).

[25] During the duration of your sentence you shall not possess, consume or use any alcohol or illicit drugs.

[26] You shall attend an assessment for drug and alcohol as directed by a probation officer.

[27] You shall attend and complete any counselling, treatment or programme directed by a probation officer.

[28] You shall reside continuously at 21 Pringle Place, Nawton and not move to any new address without the prior written approval of a probation officer.

[29] You shall notify a probation officer prior to commencing, terminating or varying employment or voluntary work.

[30] You shall undertake and complete any appropriate assessment, treatment or counselling as directed by and to the satisfaction of a probation officer.

_{[31] You may now stand down.}

_{D B Collins J}

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Hamilton