Tregoweth v The Queen

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA231/2021
[2021] NZCA 276

BETWEEN	PETER JAMES TREGOWETH Appellant
AND	THE QUEEN Respondent

Hearing:	23 June 2021
Court:	French, Thomas and Muir JJ
Counsel:	O S Winter and G M Stone for Appellant M H Cooke for Respondent
Judgment:	25 June 2021 at 11 am

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe appeal against sentence is allowed.
BThe sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment is quashed and substituted by a sentence of two years’ imprisonment.
CThe following special release conditions are imposed:
(i)     The appellant is not to possess, consume or use any alcohol or drugs not prescribed to him.
(ii)     The appellant is to attend an assessment for alcohol and drug counselling, including an assessment for residential alcohol and drug treatment, as directed by his Probation Officer. He is to attend and complete any counselling, treatment or programme as recommended by the assessment or assessments as directed by and to the satisfaction of his Probation Officer.
(iii)    The appellant is to undertake and complete any other appropriate assessment, treatment and/or counselling as directed by and to the satisfaction of his Probation Officer.
DThe standard and special release conditions expire six months after the sentence expiry date.

____________________________________________________________________

[Reasons to follow]

Solicitors:
WinterWoods, Palmerston North for Appellant
Crown Law Office, Wellington for Respondent

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Peter James Tregoweth appealed against the sentence imposed on him by the High Court. The nature of the dispute was the severity of the sentence and whether it was appropriate in the circumstances. The Court of Appeal of New Zealand heard the appeal and delivered its decision on 25 June 2021. The appeal was heard by French, Thomas, and Muir JJ. The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the sentence was excessive or manifestly excessive, and if the special release conditions imposed were appropriate. The court found that the sentence was manifestly excessive and quashed the original sentence of two years and three months’ imprisonment, substituting it with a sentence of two years’ imprisonment. The court also imposed special release conditions, including restrictions on alcohol and drug use, mandatory assessments and treatment for alcohol and drug counselling, and any other appropriate assessments, treatment, or counselling as directed by the Probation Officer. The standard and special release conditions expire six months after the sentence expiry date. The court found that the sentence was manifestly excessive and did not reflect the appropriate balance between punishment and rehabilitation. The court substituted the original sentence with a sentence of two years’ imprisonment, and imposed special release conditions to ensure that the appellant receives the necessary support and treatment to address his alcohol and drug issues.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established