Stephens v The King

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA723/2022
[2023] NZCA 73

BETWEEN	KATHY YU-JEN STEPHENS Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	20 March 2023
Court:	Brown, Lang and Palmer JJ
Counsel:	J W Wall for Appellant A M McClintock and V E Squires for Respondent
Judgment:	21 March 2023 at 10.30 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe appeal is allowed.
BThe sentences of seven months’ home detention on the offence of receiving and two months’ home detention on the offence of possession of utensils are quashed. There is substituted a sentence of six months’ supervision with the following special conditions:
(i)to reside at an address approved by a probation officer and not move to any new residential address without the prior written approval of a probation officer; and
(ii)to undertake and complete appropriate assessment, treatment or counselling as directed by and to the satisfaction of a probation officer.

____________________________________________________________________

[Reasons to follow]

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor, Auckland for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Kathy Yu-Jen Stephens appealed against her conviction and sentence for receiving stolen property and possession of utensils. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, consisting of Brown, Lang, and Palmer JJ. The court heard submissions from J W Wall for the appellant and A M McClintock and V E Squires for the respondent.

The court was required to determine the appropriate legal principles to apply in reviewing the sentence imposed by the District Court. The central issue was whether the original sentence of seven months' home detention for receiving and two months' home detention for possession of utensils was appropriate. The appeal also questioned whether the special conditions imposed by the sentencing judge were justified.

The Court of Appeal found that the original sentences were excessive and did not adequately reflect the nature and circumstances of the offences. The court considered that the sentence should be reduced to six months' supervision, with specific conditions imposed to ensure compliance and address the underlying issues that led to the offending behaviour. The special conditions included requiring Ms Stephens to reside at an approved address and to undergo assessment, treatment, or counselling as directed by a probation officer.

The appeal was allowed, and the original sentences were quashed. In their place, a sentence of six months' supervision was imposed, with the special conditions outlined in the judgment.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established