Youth Court Decisions How to Use Full list of key titles CYPFA section Date

R v LF, 17 August 2007, Youth Court, Waitakere, CRI-2005-004-014541, Judge P Recordon

Name: R v LF
Unreported
File number: CRI-2005-004-014541
Court: Youth Court
Location: Waitakere
Date: 17 August 2007
Judge: Judge P Recordon
Charge: GBH with intent to cause GBH
CYPFA: s283(o)
Key title: orders – convict and transfer s283(o)
Case Summary:
LF (15 ½ yrs at the time of the offence) charged with two others after fight outside school ball after-party. LF and victim from rival schools, and associated with (but not part of) rival gangs. LF challenged victim to fist fight, which proceeded until victim was hit over the head by another offender with a piece of wood. LF kicked victim in the head as he lay on the ground after being hit with the wood. A bystander broke up the fight but victim was left close to death, and suffers from ongoing problems.

LF first appeared in Youth Court on 21 July 2005. Preliminary hearing in the Youth Court established a case to answer. Adult co-offenders then committed to High Court. LF offered Youth Court jurisdiction based on LF’s clean record, his age, and CYPFA youth justice principles.

Delays in proceeding with defended hearing. Defended hearing held 12 months after first appearance (July 2006), with Court finding that charge was appropriate given evidence that LF could have caused brain injury by kicking.

FGC held September 2006. No decisions or recommendations made. Victims family forgave LF and invited LF and family around for a meal. Social worker report eventually prepared December 2006. Report recommended supervision order with detailed conditions. Court asked counsel for submissions relating to extending YC jurisdiction until LF was 19 yrs old. Court also asked CYF for further comprehensive plan involving LF’s school. Hearing in June 2007 to consider plan.

Meanwhile Crown counsel questioning delays, and lack of orders. Suggested Court was preparing a backdoor to a s282 discharge, and conducting an “experiment”, “so inconsistent with what was required by law that the case would raise issues of credibility that could compromise the situation” . LF’s counsel advocating extended plan which would lead to s283 discharge.

Court considered s283(o) conviction and transfer to District Court. Cited S v Police [2000] NZFLR 380 (Potter J), W v Registrar of the Youth Court (Tokoroa) [1999] NZFLR 1000, and s284 factors. Judge acknowledged likelihood of appeals, and commented that appeal court would need to consider differences between Justice Harrison in Police v Moala (HC, Auckland, CRI-2006-404-389, 2 March 2007, Harrison J), and Justices Heath and Courtney in X v Police (2005) 22 CRNZ 58 in relation to sentencing of youth offenders in the adult courts.

Court also highlighted CYPFA age-related principles and cited W & Ors v Registrar of the Youth Court (Tokoroa) [1999] FRNZ 433 in the CA, before canvassing recent s283(o) cases.

Decision
Decision adjourned. LF to participate in detailed social work plan til age 19. Conviction and transfer not appropriate due to high likelihood of rehabilitation plus good family and victim support. Seriousness of offence noted. By the time he is 19, LF will have been subject to plan terms the equivalent of home detention for 3 ½ years.

Court acknowledged that LF would prefer prison, and may not be the perfect candidate for Youth Court rehabilitation, due to minor bail breaches and attitude towards schooling. Also acknowledged that success of plan relies on the social worker. Judge promised to monitor LF’s progress every two months, and transfer LF to District Court “if LF goes off the rails”.