Download Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New

Conviction and Sentencing of
Offenders in New Zealand:
1997 to 2006
Conviction and Sentencing of
Offenders in New Zealand:
1997 to 2006
Bronwyn Morrison
Nataliya Soboleva
Jin Chong
April 2008
Published April 2008
Ministry of Justice
PO Box 180
Wellington
New Zealand
www.justice.govt.nz
ISSN 1177-9799 (Online)
© Crown Copyright
2
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Foreword
The annual ‘Conviction and Sentencing’ report is now well established as a primary source of
information about the criminal justice sector. It contains a comprehensive range of statistics
on New Zealand criminal court proceedings and sentencing, and is recognised as part of the
Tier 1 statistics in Statistics New Zealand’s official statistics programme.
The Ministry of Justice is committed to supplying high quality policy advice on a range of
criminal justice issues, and this report provides a robust empirical basis for such advice.
Policy development also benefits from consultation and collaboration with individuals or
groups who have an interest in the issue under investigation. In order for the public to be
fully equipped to discuss policy proposals, it is essential that they are well informed. This
report represents one means by which the Ministry disseminates information to the public
about trends and developments in the criminal justice system.
Previously youth justice statistics have been published as a chapter in the ‘Conviction and
Sentencing’ report series. However, since 2007 youth justice statistics have been published
in a stand-alone report. The first youth justice statistical report, ‘Youth Justice Statistics in
New Zealand: 1992 to 2006’ was published in July 2007. The report examined trends in
Police apprehensions, prosecutions, convictions and sentencing of young people aged 14 to
16 years, and is available for download from the Ministry of Justice web site at
www.justice.govt.nz.
Some of the statistics presented in this report are also available online through the Table
Builder function on the Statistics New Zealand web site (www.stats.govt.nz). These statistics
are updated annually.
Belinda Clark
Secretary for Justice
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3
4
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Bronwyn Morrison, Nataliya Soboleva and Jin Chong for producing this report.
Thanks also to Jason Gleason, Ong Su-Wuen, Stephen Christie, Roy Wyatt, and Angela Lee
of the Ministry of Justice for their input into this publication. The draft version was reviewed
by Chris Hurd and Wiebe Zwaga. Your advice, comments, and suggestions were greatly
appreciated.
I would also like to thank Judith Spier, who formatted the report to the Ministry’s standards,
and Sarah Maclean for proof-reading the final report.
Finally, I would like to thank Philip Spier and Barb Lash, former Senior Advisers in the
Ministry of Justice, for their work on previous editions of this report.
David Turner
Director
Research, Evaluation and Modelling Unit
Ministry of Justice
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
5
6
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Contents
Foreword
3
Acknowledgements
5
Tables
9
Figures
13
Executive Summary
15
1
Introduction
21
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
21
22
22
23
24
25
26
2
3
Background
Source of the data
Recording of appeals
Identification of cases
Quality of the data
Comparability with previous reports
Structure of the report
Prosecutions and convictions for all offences
29
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.16
29
30
33
36
38
40
41
42
44
45
46
48
50
52
55
57
Introduction
Outcome of prosecutions
Convictions for offences in each major offence category
Average seriousness of all offences
Convictions for violent offences
Convictions for other offences against the person
Convictions for property offences
Convictions for drug offences
Convictions for offences against the administration of justice
Convictions for offences against good order
Convictions for traffic offences
Convictions for miscellaneous offences
Courts where convictions were finalised in 2006
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders convicted
Victims of sex offences in 2006
Summary of key findings
Sentencing for all offences
59
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
59
61
64
68
74
77
81
86
91
Introduction
Sentencing legislation
Sentencing for all cases
Sentencing for violent offences
Sentencing for other offences against the person
Sentencing for property offences
Sentencing for drug offences
Sentencing for offences against the administration of justice
Sentencing for offences against good order
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
7
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
4
5
6
7
8
Sentencing for traffic offences
Sentencing for miscellaneous offences
Sentences imposed in each court in 2006 for all offences
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders
Summary of key findings
94
97
100
103
105
Custodial sentences and remands
107
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
107
109
111
112
113
115
117
119
Introduction
Types of offences resulting in custodial sentences
Custodial sentence lengths imposed
Non-parole periods imposed for indeterminate sentences
Prisoner numbers
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders sent to prison in 2006
Custodial remands
Summary of key findings
Community-based sentences
121
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
121
123
125
128
Introduction
Work-related community sentences
Supervision
Summary of key findings
Monetary penalties
129
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
129
131
134
137
139
Introduction
Use of fines
Use of reparation for all offences
Use of reparation for property offences
Summary of key findings
Summary of main findings
141
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
142
146
150
151
152
Prosecutions and convictions for all offences
Sentencing trends in general
Custodial sentences and remands
Community-based sentences
Monetary penalties
References
155
Appendix A
157
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Tables
Table 1.1
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 2.6
Table 2.7
Table 2.8
Table 2.9
Table 2.10
Table 2.11
Table 2.12
Table 2.13
Table 2.14
Table 2.15
Table 2.16
Table 2.17
Table 2.18
Table 2.19
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 3.3
Table 3.4
Table 3.5
Table 3.6
Table 3.7
Differences in 2004 cases and convictions: LES (old) vs. CMS (new)
Outcome of all charges prosecuted, 1997 to 2006
Outcome of all charges prosecuted, by type of offence, 2006
Total number of charges resulting in conviction, by type of offence, 1997
to 2006
Percentage of all convictions involving each type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions with each level of offence seriousness and average
seriousness of all convictions, 1997 to 2006
Average seriousness of convictions, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for violent offences, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for other offences against the person, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for property offences, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for drug offences, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for offences against the administration of justice,
1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for offences against good order, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for traffic offences, 1997 to 2006
Number of convictions for miscellaneous offences, 1997 to 2006
Courts where convictions were finalised, by type of offence, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
gender of offender, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
age of offender, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
ethnicity of offender, 2006
Number of convictions for various sex offences, by age and gender of the
victim, 2006
Total number of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence,
1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence,
1997 to 2006
Average seriousness of cases resulting in each type of sentence, and
average seriousness of all cases resulting in conviction, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences with each level of
offence seriousness and average seriousness of violent offences, 1997
to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences by offence type,
1997 to 2006
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
24
30
32
33
33
37
37
39
40
41
42
45
46
47
49
51
53
54
55
56
64
65
67
68
68
70
71
9
Table 3.8
Table 3.9
Table 3.10
Table 3.11
Table 3.12
Table 3.13
Table 3.14
Table 3.15
Table 3.16
Table 3.17
Table 3.18
Table 3.19
Table 3.20
Table 3.21
Table 3.22
Table 3.23
Table 3.24
Table 3.25
Table 3.26
Table 3.27
Table 3.28
Table 3.29
Table 3.30
10
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by violent
offence type, 1997 to 2006
72
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of violent
offence, 1997 to 2006
73
Number of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
74
Percentage of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
75
Number of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
by offence type, 1997 to 2006
75
Percentage of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
resulting in a custodial sentence, by offence type, 1997 to 2006
76
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of other
offence against the person, 1997 to 2006
76
Number of convicted cases involving property offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
77
Percentage of convicted cases involving property offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
77
Number of convicted cases involving property offences with each level
of offence seriousness and average seriousness of property offences,
1997 to 2006
78
Number of convicted cases involving each property offence, 1997 to 2006
79
Percentage of convicted cases involving property offence resulting in a
custodial sentence by offence type, 1997 to 2006
80
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
property offence, 1997 to 2006
81
Number of convicted cases involving drug offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
82
Percentage of convicted cases involving drug offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
82
Number of convicted cases involving drug offences with each level of
offence seriousness and average seriousness of drug offences, 1997
to 2006
83
Number of convicted cases involving each drug offence, 1997 to 2006
84
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type
of drug offence, 1997 to 2006
84
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of drug
offence, 1997 to 2006
85
Number of convicted cases involving offences against the administration
of justice resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
87
Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against the administration
of justice resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
87
Number of convicted cases involving each offence against the administration
of justice, 1997 to 2006
88
Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against the administration
of justice resulting in a custodial sentence, by offence type, 1997 to 2006
88
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.31
Table 3.32
Table 3.33
Table 3.34
Table 3.35
Table 3.36
Table 3.37
Table 3.38
Table 3.39
Table 3.40
Table 3.41
Table 3.42
Table 3.43
Table 3.44
Table 3.45
Table 3.46
Table 3.47
Table 3.48
Table 3.49
Table 3.50
Table 4.1
Table 4.2
Table 4.3
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of offence
against the administration of justice, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving offences against good order resulting
in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against good order
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving each offence against good order,
1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type
of offence against good order, 1997 to 2006
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of offence
against good order, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in each type
of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving each traffic offence by offence type,
1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in a
custodial sentence by offence type, 1997 to 2006
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of traffic
offence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving miscellaneous offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases involving miscellaneous offences resulting
in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
Number of convicted cases involving each miscellaneous offence, 1997
to 2006
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of
miscellaneous offence, 1997 to 2006
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
miscellaneous offence, 1997 to 2006
Most serious sentence imposed for all convicted cases finalised in each
court location, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and gender of the offender, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and age of the offender, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and ethnicity of the offender, 2006
Total number of cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of
offence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence involving each type
of offence, 1997 to 2006
Total number of custodial sentences imposed of various lengths, and
average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), 1997 to 2006
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
90
91
92
92
93
93
94
94
95
96
96
98
98
99
99
100
101
103
104
104
110
110
111
11
Table 4.4
Table 4.5
Table 4.6
Table 4.7
Table 4.8
Table 4.9
Table 4.10
Table 5.1
Table 5.2
Table 5.3
Table 5.4
Table 5.5
Table 5.6
Table 5.7
Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 6.3
Table 6.4
Table 6.5
Table 6.6
Table 6.7
Table 6.8
Table 6.9
Table 6.10
12
Lengths of non-parole periods imposed for life imprisonment sentences,
1997 to 2006
Lengths of non-parole periods imposed for preventive detention sentences,
1997 to 2006
Annual average number of prisoners, 1997 to 2006
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders in all cases resulting in a custodial
sentence, 2006
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2006
Total number of cases involving a period of remand in custody of various
lengths, and average custodial remand period per case (in days), 2004
to 2006
Total number of cases of duration of more than one day involving a
period of remand in custody of various percentage of entire case spent
in custodial remand, 2004 to 2006
Total number of cases resulting in work-related community sentences
as the most serious sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of cases resulting in work-related community sentences as
the most serious sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Number of work-related community sentences imposed of various lengths,
and average length of work-related community sentences (in hours),
1997 to 2006
Total number of cases resulting in supervision as the most serious
sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of cases resulting in supervision as the most serious
sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Number of supervision sentences imposed of various lengths, and
average length of supervision sentences (in months), 1997 to 2006
Total number of cases resulting in a supervision sentence in conjunction
with periodic detention or community work, by type of offence, 1997 to
2006
Total number of convicted charges resulting in a fine, by type of offence,
1997 to 2006
Percentage of all convicted charges resulting in a fine, by type of offence,
1997 to 2006
Amounts of fines imposed, 1997 to 2006
Other sentences imposed with fines, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of fines imposed with other sentences, 1997 to 2006
Total number of convicted charges resulting in reparation, by type of
offence, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of convicted charges of each type of offence resulting in
reparation, 1997 to 2006
Amounts imposed for all offences resulting in reparation, 1997 to 2006
Other sentences imposed with reparation, 1997 to 2006
Percentage of reparation sentences imposed with other sentences, 1997
to 2006
112
113
114
116
117
118
119
123
123
125
126
126
127
127
131
132
132
133
133
134
135
136
137
137
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 6.11
Table 6.12
Table 6.13
Table A1
Table A2
Table A3
Table A4
Table A5
Number of convicted property charges resulting in a sentence of reparation,
by type of property offence, 1997 to 2006
138
Percentage of convicted property charges resulting in a sentence of
reparation, by type of property offence, 1997 to 2006
138
Percentage of convictions for property offences resulting in reparation in
each court area, 1997 to 2006
139
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
ethnicity of offender, 2005
157
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and ethnicity of the offender, 2005
157
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders in all cases resulting in a custodial
sentence, 2005
158
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2004
159
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2005
159
Figures
Figure 1.1
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Flow of charges and cases through the criminal justice system
21
Percentage of prosecutions resulting in each type of outcome, 1997 to 2006 31
Percentage of all convictions involving each type of offence, 1997 to 2006
35
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to
2006
66
Percentage of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
69
Percentage of violent offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence, and
average seriousness of violent offences resulting in conviction, 1997 to
2006
70
Percentage of property offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence,
and average seriousness of property offences resulting in conviction,
1997 to 2006
79
Percentage of drug offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence, and
average seriousness of drug offences resulting in conviction, 1997 to 2006 83
Annual average number of sentenced prisoners, by gender, 1997 to 2006 114
Annual average number of remand prisoners, 1997 to 2006
115
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
13
14
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Executive Summary
This report examines trends in prosecutions, convictions and sentencing over the decade
from 1997 to 2006. The data on which this report is based were released as Tier 1 Statistics
on Statistics New Zealand’s web site in December 2007. This release was accompanied by
the publication of a summary report titled ‘Statistical Bulletin: An Overview of Conviction and
Sentencing Statistics in New Zealand 1997 to 2006’, which is available for download from the
Ministry of Justice web site (www.justice.govt.nz).
The current report provides a more detailed breakdown of the data released in December
2007, and incorporates additional information about the sentenced and remand prisoner
populations. It also includes an analysis of longitudinal trends in seriousness scores for
certain offence categories.
The information presented in this report relates to charges and cases. A charge refers to
each separate criminal prosecution processed by the courts. A case counts charges against
the same individual, and can involve one or multiple charges. The charge taken to represent
the case is the one that resulted in the most serious sentence.
Overall Trends
Over the decade from 1997 to 2006 the following key trends were observed in relation to
criminal prosecutions, convictions and other outcomes, and sentences:
•
The total number of charges prosecuted in New Zealand courts generally increased from
2002 onwards. The number remained relatively constant between 2004 and 2005,
before increasing by 7% in 2006. Most charges involved either property or traffic
offences.
•
A conviction was the most common prosecution outcome throughout the decade,
however the proportion of charges resulting in a conviction declined slightly over the
period (from 69% to 65%).
•
The number of charges resulting in a conviction increased from 2002 onwards, rising by
18% between 2002 and 2006.
•
The number of charges resulting in a conviction generally increased for most offence
categories over the decade; convictions for miscellaneous offences exhibited the largest
increased at 96%, followed by offences against justice and offences against good order,
which respectively increased by 61% and 51%. However, convictions for charges
involving property and drug offences declined by 12% and 13% respectively.
•
Monetary penalties were the most common sentence imposed over the decade.
Approximately half of all convicted cases each year resulted in monetary penalties as the
most serious sentence.
•
Fines were most frequently imposed for charges involving traffic offences, a trend which
has increased slightly over the decade.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
15
•
Reparation was most likely to be imposed for charges involving property offences.
However, the proportion of all charges resulting in reparation that involved property
offences declined over the decade, as reparation sentences have been more frequently
imposed for other types of offence (particularly traffic and violent offences).
•
After monetary penalties, work-related community sentences were the next most
common type of sentence imposed during the decade. Cases involving traffic and
property offences represented the largest proportion of cases resulting in this type of
sentence. Although cases involving violence were less likely to result in work-related
community sentences, between 2004 and 2006, an increasing number of violent cases
were resolved in this manner.
•
The number of convicted cases resulting in custodial sentences remained relatively
constant between 1997 and 2002, before increasing by 7% in 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, the number of cases resulting in imprisonment remained stable at an average of
10,458. Most custodial sentences were imposed in cases involving property, violent, or
traffic offences.
•
Most custodial sentences imposed were under one year in duration, although the average
sentence length ranged from 13 to 15 months over the decade. Since 2004, however,
the average custodial sentence length has remained stable at an average of 14 months.
The following sections describe the key findings and trends in more detail.
Prosecutions
In 2006, a total of 308,965 charges were prosecuted in New Zealand courts. Most
prosecutions involved property or traffic offending, which respectively accounted for 27% and
25% of all charges prosecuted in 2006.
Convictions
In 2006, a total of 201,517 charges resulted in a conviction. This represented a 7% increase
from 2005.
Traffic offences
Traffic offences accounted for the highest proportion of all convictions between 1997 and
2006. However, convictions for traffic offences represented a slightly decreasing proportion
of all convictions over the decade, from 33% in 1997 to 31% in 2006. From a decade low of
54,541 in 2002, the number of traffic convictions rose by 16% to reach 63,360 in 2006, the
highest level recorded over the decade. This increase can be largely attributed to a growth in
the number of convictions for driving with excess breath or blood alcohol levels.
Property offences
Charges involving property offences made up the second largest percentage of all
convictions after traffic offences. However, charges involving property offences decreased
as a proportion of all convictions, from 30% in 1997 to 24% in 2006. In 2006, the number of
convictions for property offences increased slightly. This was predominantly due to an
16
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
increase in convictions for wilful damage, in addition to a small increase in the number of
convictions for theft.
Violent offences
During the decade violent offences accounted for an average of 9% of all charges convicted
each year. Between 2002 and 2006, the number of convictions for violent offences increased
by 18%. This was predominantly due to a rise in the number of convictions for male assaults
female and serious assault, which increased by 37%, and 30% respectively between 2002
and 2006.
Offences against justice
The proportion of convictions for offences against justice increased from 8% in 1997 to 12%
in 2006. Between 2002 and 2006, the number of convictions for offences against justice
increased by 59%, rising from 14,972 to 23,840. This was predominantly due to an increase
in convictions for breaches of work-related community sentences, failure to answer bail,
breaching release conditions, and breaching supervision.
Drug offences
Drug offences accounted for a declining proportion of all convictions over the decade,
dropping from 8% in 1998 to 6% in 2006. The number of convictions for drug offences
generally decreased during this time, although the number rose slightly in 2006. This was
due to a 12% rise in the number of convictions for non-cannabis-related drug offences.
Offences against good order
Convictions for charges involving offences against good order accounted for a small but
increasing proportion of all convictions over the decade, comprising 7% of all convictions in
2006. The number of convictions for offences against good order generally increased over
the decade. From 2005 to 2006, the number rose by 12% to reach a decade high of 15,009
in 2006. Changes in the number of convictions for this offence category have largely been
driven by changes in the number of convictions for disorderly behaviour.
Sentencing
Significant changes were made to the sentencing regime in New Zealand by the Sentencing
Act 2002, which came into force on 30 June 2002. However, due to the transitional nature of
the provisions contained in the Act, and the relatively short time that has elapsed since it
came into force, the impact of the new Act is unlikely to be fully evident in the statistics
presented in this report.
In 2006, a total of 112,774 cases resulted in a conviction. Of these, 47% (53,207) resulted in
a monetary penalty, 24% (27,196) in a work-related community sentence, 11% (12,253) in a
conviction and discharge, 9% (10,496) in a custodial sentence, 5% (5,345) in a deferment,
2% (2,243) in a supervision sentence, and 2% (2,061) in ‘other’ sentences. This is similar to
the distribution in 2005.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
17
Monetary Penalties: Fines and Reparation
Across the decade the number of charges resulting in a fine increased by 10%, rising from
56,276 in 1997 to 62,168 in 2006. Of the charges resulting in a fine in 2006, 52% involved
traffic offences and 20% involved miscellaneous offences.
The median fine imposed increased from $250 in 1997 to $300 in 1999, and subsequently
remained at this level for the rest of the decade. The total amount of fines imposed
increased by 35% across the decade, from $23 million in 1997 to $31 million in 2006.
The total number of charges resulting in reparation increased by 35% over the decade, rising
from 12,880 in 1997 to 17,392 in 2006.
Charges involving property offences accounted for the majority of all reparation sentences
imposed during the decade. However, although the number of property charges resulting in
reparation sentences increased over the decade, property offences comprised a decreasing
proportion of all reparation sentences. This was due to the increased use of reparation for
charges involving violent and traffic offences, which both tripled over the decade.
The median amount of reparation imposed increased over the decade, rising from $218 in
1997 to $300 in 2006. The total amount of reparation imposed almost doubled during this
time, increasing from $12 million in 1997 to $23 million in 2006.
Community-based sentences
The number of convicted cases resulting in work-related community sentences as the most
serious sentence increased by 9% between 1997 and 1998, before declining by 15% to
reach 25,519 in 2000. It remained at this level until 2006, when the number increased by
9%. This was predominantly due to increases in the number of work-related community
sentences imposed for traffic offences, property offences, and offences against justice.
The average length of work-related community sentences declined between 2004 and 2006,
from 123 hours to 116 hours.
The total number of cases resulting in supervision sentences as the most serious sentence
generally declined over the decade, decreasing by 62% between 1997 and 2003 (from 5,037
to 1,894). The number increased slightly between 2004 and 2005, before declining to 2,243
in 2006.
Throughout the decade, cases involving violent offences accounted for the greatest
proportion of supervision sentences. The number of supervision sentences imposed
generally decreased for most categories of offence over the decade, with the exception of
offences against the administration of justice.
Over the decade the average length of supervision sentences imposed was around 10
months.
18
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Custodial sentences
Between 1997 and 2002, 8% of convicted cases resulted in a custodial sentence. However,
in 2003 9% of all convicted cases received custodial sentences, and between 2004 and
2006, an average of 10% of all convicted cases had custodial sentences imposed each year.
Property offences represented the largest proportion of all cases resulting in a custodial
sentence each year during the decade, accounting for an average of 30% of custodial
sentences imposed each year. The number of property cases resulting in custody increased
for most of the decade, but declined slightly between 2004 and 2006.
Cases involving violent offences represented the next largest proportion of cases resulting in
a custodial sentence, representing an average of 26% of custodial sentences imposed each
year. The number of custodial sentences imposed for cases involving violent offences
trended upwards after 2002.
Cases involving traffic offences consistently accounted for around one-fifth of all custodial
sentences imposed each year during the decade.
The average custodial sentence length (including life imprisonment and preventive detention
sentences) increased over the decade, rising from 13 and a half months in 1997 to almost 16
months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the average length was 14 months. However, the
majority of custodial sentences imposed were for 12 months or less, and in 2006 70% of
custodial sentences were for 12 months or less.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
19
20
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
1
Introduction
1.1
Background
This report examines trends in prosecutions, convictions, and sentencing over a ten-year
period. It includes all charges and cases finalised in the calendar years from 1997 to 2006,
describing decade trends as well as key statistics for 2006. Where possible, it offers
preliminary explanations for major changes occurring during the decade.
Figure 1.1 illustrates the flow of charges through the criminal justice system. The scope of
the data contained in this report encompasses the shaded part of the diagram, from
prosecution outcomes through to sentencing.
Figure 1.1
Flow of charges and cases through the criminal justice system
In this report, conviction trends are examined for:
•
offending overall
•
offences grouped into categories.
•
different types of offences within these categories
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
21
The grouped offence categories reported on are:
•
violent offences
•
other offences against the person
•
property offences
•
drug offences
•
offences against good order
•
offences against the administration of justice
•
traffic offences
•
offences not otherwise classified (i.e. miscellaneous offences).
For each of these offence categories, detail is provided on the offences that were most
frequent, most serious, or thought to be of interest to the wider public.
1.2
Source of the data
Prior to 2004, unless otherwise specified, the figures in this report came from the Case
Monitoring Subsystem of the Law Enforcement System (LES) on the former Wanganui
Computer System. This subsystem recorded the court processing of charges.
During the second half of 2003, a new computer system for storing information about charges
was brought online. The new system is known as the Case Management System (CMS).
Because information entered on CMS was electronically passed back to LES until LES was
decommissioned in 2005, information for the whole of 2003 was available from LES.
However, from the beginning of 2004, all courts entered data only on CMS. The figures for
2004 to 2006 presented in this report are therefore the first to be produced from CMS data.
CMS differs from LES and the system changes may have affected statistical trends. Some of
the areas that are likely to have been the most affected are:
•
the recording of appeals (see Section 1.3)
•
the identification of cases (see Section 1.4).
These changes are discussed in detail below.
1.3
Recording of appeals
The structure of the LES data meant that it was difficult to identify charges that had been
appealed (particularly charges that were under appeal at the end of each year). In CMS
charges under appeal, and outcomes and sentences that are the result of an appeal, are
more clearly identified.
In the LES data, when a charge was under appeal at the end of a year, the same charge
could appear in the data extract for the next year, often with a different outcome (i.e. a ‘not
convicted’ outcome) or sentence. Duplicated charges were removed from the statistical
database, and it was assumed that all of the duplicates were because of appeals. However,
22
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
it was not possible to be certain that this was the case. Because of the improved recording of
appeals on CMS, it should now be possible to identify why duplicates have been produced in
the data.
Because of the appeals process, some charges that were nominally resolved at the end of a
calendar year get transferred to the following year. For this reason, each time a new report in
this series is issued, figures for all years are recalculated and, due to appeals, figures for
cases resolved in the previous years may change slightly.
A minor effect of the better recording of information on charges that have been appealed is
that some charges have the final court recorded as the Court of Appeal. Previously no cases
or charges had the final court recorded as the Court of Appeal.
1.4
Identification of cases
Some of the information presented in this report (especially in Chapters 3, 4 and 5) relates to
cases rather than charges. Prior to 2004, cases were not explicitly identified in the database,
so a method was developed to determine which charges would most likely belong to the
same case. Charges against one person were combined to form a case if they had either the
first or final court hearing date in common. However, it is feasible that charges without a first
or a final court hearing date in common could potentially still belong to the same case.
With the changeover to CMS, it became possible to join charges belonging to the same case
in the database. The need to estimate which charges belong to the same case has, at least
in theory, thus been eliminated. However, there are some issues with the way that cases are
joined in CMS. While the definition of cases used in the figures for 2004 to 2006 is based on
the way that cases are joined in CMS, two minor adjustments were made:
First, only charges relating to a single individual were combined to form a case. In CMS
charges against different people may be joined into the same case. Since case-based
statistics require that the charges in a case relate to the same person, charges for different
people joined into the same case were not combined to form a case for the purposes of this
report.
Second, associated charges not linked in CMS were combined to form a case when a
person:
•
received two or more custodial sentences on the same day
•
received two or more community-based sentences on the same day.
The decision was made to combine such charges to form a single case because it is unlikely
that a single individual would receive two or more custodial or community-based sentences
on the same day for different cases.
The different construction of cases for the 2004 to 2006 figures may have caused changes in
the figures and trends. Using 2004 data, Table 1.1 illustrates differences posted by the old
method (prior to 2004) and the new method.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
23
Table 1.1
Differences in 2004 cases and convictions: LES (old) vs. CMS (new)
Comparison
Cases
Convicted cases
Old
(LES)
144,18
0
New
(CMS)
159,26
2
102,83
3
109,52
5
Variance
+15,082
+6,692
Comments on variance in terms of
the proportion of cases
+2% ‘not proved’
–3% convicted cases
+3% convicted and discharged
–1% community work
–1% monetary penalty
+2% offence against justice
–2% traffic offences
While differences were found between LES and CMS in terms of the numbers of both cases
and convicted cases in 2004, the average seriousness scores for various sentences
produced by each method were almost the same.
In summary, the system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This
may have caused changes in the figures and trends that are observed prior to 2003 and
following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004 may not represent
a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be exercised when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. It should be noted that for these
reasons, case statistics appearing in this report are reported across two time periods: 1997 to
2003 and 2004 to 2006 (in both tables and text).
1.5
Quality of the data
Neither the data extracted from CMS nor LES can be regarded as absolutely accurate. It
would be impossible to guarantee perfect accuracy even in the best of circumstances,
because of the enormous number of charges. Incorrect codes are occasionally entered into
the computer system, and duplicate records sometimes arise for a variety of reasons (e.g.
appeals). Some of the data problems were corrected in the production of this report and,
while there may be small errors in some of the figures shown, the data are sufficiently
accurate to indicate trends over time in prosecutions, convictions, and sentences.
Information is presented in the report on the gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders. This
data is usually recorded by the prosecuting authority (mostly the Police) at the time of arrest.
Data on the gender and date of birth (used to calculate the age) of offenders is generally
accurate. During the arrest process, it is general practice for Police officers to ask offenders
to identify their ethnic group for recording purposes. However, this is not always practical, as
the offender may be uncooperative. In such circumstances, officers will use their judgement
or knowledge about a person to determine that person's ethnicity. Recording ethnicity in this
way may potentially categorise people into an ethnic group that they may not personally
choose to identify with. Finally, it is important to note that Police record just one ethnic group
per individual for each arrest, rather than allowing a person to be classified into more than
one ethnic group. Data on the ethnicity of offenders convicted in 2006 was available for 87%
of cases. Cases where ethnicity was not recorded often involved minor traffic offences or
miscellaneous offences (for which the prosecuting authority is not usually the Police).
24
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Offenders who default in the payment of a fine or reparation sentence can have an
alternative sentence of imprisonment or community work substituted by a judge. Before the
Sentencing Act 2002 came into force, corrective training, periodic detention, or community
service could also be imposed. This sentence substitution is not usually recorded in the data
used for this report. However, often when a person has an alternative sentence substituted
for default in the payment of a monetary penalty they have other offending being dealt with as
part of the same case, and this other offending is included in the data. Nevertheless, the
number of community-based sentences specified in this report is likely to be an undercount of
the actual number required to be served. Imprisonment is rarely imposed for defaulting in the
payment of monetary penalties. Consequently, there is less likelihood of undercounting
custodial sentences.
Offenders sentenced to a community-based sentence can also, under certain circumstances
have their sentence reviewed (for example, if an offender has failed or is unable to comply
with any condition or requirement of the sentence). This sometimes results in another
sentence being substituted. This type of sentence substitution is not typically captured in the
data used for this report.
People who received a suspended sentence of imprisonment could have the sentence
activated if they were convicted of a further offence within the suspension period prior to the
abolition of this type of sentence in mid-2002. While the activation of prison sentences was
not usually recorded in the data used for this report, instances where a person was
imprisoned for the reconviction offence at the same time a suspended prison sentence was
activated were included in the data. If the reconviction offence did not result in imprisonment,
but the suspended prison sentence was activated, then the number of prison sentences
presented in this report would be an undercount to that extent.
Over the ten-year period covered by this report a number of less serious offences (both traffic
and non-traffic) became reclassified as infringement offences, meaning that they could be
dealt with by way of an infringement notice rather than summary prosecution. Infringement
notices do not involve a prosecution in the normal sense of that term, and do not result in a
conviction. In some instances, therefore, significant drops in the number of prosecutions,
and thus convictions, can be attributed to offences becoming reclassified as infringement
offences and no longer prosecuted summarily, rather than any real change in offending
patterns. Where applicable, this has been highlighted in the report.
1.6
Comparability with previous reports
The effects of the change in the source of the data used to produce this report have already
been discussed above. However, there is one further change relating to the calculation of
seriousness scores, which means that some figures appearing in this report cannot be
compared with those in previous publications. The seriousness of offence scale was updated
early in 2005, and all the seriousness scores appearing in this report have been recalculated
accordingly to take account of this change.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
25
In summary, since the annual publications were first produced, the following changes have
been made to the data reported:
•
the way that charges are formed into cases has changed
•
the formats used to group offences into the main offence categories and the offence
subcategories have been modified
•
the Ministry’s seriousness of offence scale was updated in 1995, 2000, and 2005.
The changes mean that the figures presented in the earlier publications in the series cannot
always be compared with those in the current publication. Consequently, when comparing
the data presented in this report with earlier reports, it is necessary to read the accompanying
commentaries to identify relevant changes related to particular years and/or periods of
coverage.
1.7
Structure of the report
Chapter 2 presents information on the outcome of prosecutions (criminal charges laid in
court) for all offences over the calendar years 1997 to 2006, and describes trends found in
this data. The chapter goes on to examine convictions in more depth, and presents
information on trends in the number of charges resulting in a conviction for particular types of
offence during the last ten years. It also examines changes in offence seriousness over the
decade and presents information for 2006 on the gender, age and ethnicity of offenders who
were convicted. It presents information on the courts where prosecutions were finalised in
2006. Finally, it gives a breakdown of the age and gender of the victims of sex offences that
resulted in the conviction of an offender in 2006.
Chapter 3 describes trends in sentencing for all cases resulting in a conviction. It provides
information on the number of sentences of each type that were imposed, and the seriousness
of offences resulting in each type of sentence. It also gives a breakdown of the sentences
imposed for each of the grouped offence categories. In addition, it examines custodial
sentences for particular types of offences in more depth, providing information on the
proportion of cases that resulted in a custodial outcome and the length of the custodial
sentences imposed. It presents data from 2006 on the gender, age and ethnicity of offenders
receiving each type of sentence. Finally, it describes the sentences imposed in each court
during 2006.
Chapter 4 examines the use of custodial sentences and remands. This chapter summarises
some of the results presented in Chapter 3, as well as providing some new information. The
new material includes information on:
26
•
the average number of males and females in prison at any one time over the decade
•
the lengths of prison sentences imposed over the decade
•
the lengths of non-parole periods imposed for life imprisonment and preventive detention
sentences.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Chapter 5 describes statistical trends in the use of community-based sentences. It
summarises some of the material presented in Chapter 3, as well as providing some
additional data. The new information includes data relating to:
•
the lengths of community-based sentences imposed over the decade
•
the number of cases resulting in periodic detention or community work with supervision
over the last decade.
Chapter 6 presents information on the use of fines and reparation. It includes data on:
•
the number of charges resulting in a fine
•
the amounts of fines imposed
•
sentences imposed in conjunction with fines.
This chapter also provides similar information for reparation sentences.
Chapter 7 provides a summary of the main findings described in the preceding chapters.
The report also includes appendices that present tables showing ethnicity data for 2005.
Problems with the electronic transfer of ethnicity data for 2005 were identified last year when
a larger proportion of defendants were found to have unknown ethnicity compared to
previous years. While the problems were under investigation, ethnicity data for 2004 was
presented in the 2005 report.
Most of the statistics presented in this report can be accessed through the Table Builder
function on the Statistics New Zealand web site (www.stats.govt.nz). These statistics are
updated annually.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
27
28
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
2
Prosecutions and convictions for all offences
2.1
Introduction
This chapter examines trends in the number of prosecutions and convictions for all offences
for each calendar year from 1997 to 2006.
The first part of this chapter will present statistical information on the number of prosecution
outcomes (criminal charges laid in court) for all offences over the decade. It will identify key
trends found in this data, examine the number of convictions for each type of offence, and
analyse changes in the seriousness of offences resulting in a conviction.
The second part of this chapter will summarise conviction trends over the past decade for
different offence types in more depth, including: convictions for violence, other offences
against the person, property offending, drugs, offences against the administration of justice,
offences against good order, traffic, and miscellaneous offences. Where the data allows, a
brief explanation of major changes will be provided alongside these summaries. A
breakdown of the number and proportion of convictions (by offence type) finalised in each
individual court will also be provided for 2006, excluding convictions finalised in the Court of
Appeal and Youth Court.
The third part of this chapter will present data about the gender, age and ethnicity of
offenders convicted for each offence category in 2006. It also includes data about the victims
of sex offences.
The final section will provide a brief overview of the key findings. It will highlight major trends
in the number of convictions during the decade.
Before statistical trends can be discussed, however, it is first necessary to briefly describe
the nature of the data utilised in this chapter and identify the limitations associated with its
interpretation.
The information presented in the following pages is based on the number of criminal charges
processed by courts. A change in the number of offences prosecuted in court does not
necessarily reflect a change in the actual number of offences committed in the same period.
Fluctuations occur in the number of prosecutions and convictions for different offences from
year to year. Such fluctuations are not necessarily the result of changes in offending or the
number of offenders, but may instead be caused by a range of other factors. For example,
changes in population numbers, growing levels of awareness and reporting of crime,
improvements in police recording and offence coding practices, legislative changes, as well
as changes in the availability and prioritisation of Police recourses for detecting and
investigating crime are all likely to impact on conviction numbers. As noted in Chapter 1, the
data for 2004 to 2006 in this report was extracted from the new CMS computer system. This
technological shift may also account for some changes in the number of prosecutions and
convictions during this period.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
29
Finally, it is not possible to precisely determine the relationship between the total number of
offences committed and the number of offences prosecuted in court. Not all offences
committed are discovered by, reported to, or recorded by the Police. For example, findings
from the 2006 New Zealand Crime and Safety Survey indicate that the number of offences
recorded in Police statistics represented a small proportion of the total estimated number of
1
victimisations (Mayhew and Reilly 2007). In addition, not all offences that come to Police
attention result in a prosecution, and there are significant differences between the
resolution/clearance rates and prosecution rates for different types of offences.
2.2
Outcome of prosecutions
Table 2.1 and Figure 2.1 present information on the outcome of prosecutions for all offences
between 1997 and 2006.
Table 2.1
Outcome
Outcome of all charges prosecuted, 1997 to 20061,2
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Convicted
180804 185839 178762 173275 172950 170518 180152 187120 187511 201517
Youth Court proved3
6147
6396
7259
6429
6027
5447
6787
6954
7255
7741
Discharge without
3574
3838
4313
4765
4675
4487
5054
7621
6103
6117
conviction4
5
Not proved
70987 74529 74310 76887 76723 78434 81385 86164 86265 93270
Other6
374
240
387
384
364
475
454
351
401
320
Total
261886 270842 265031 261740 260739 259361 273832 288210 287535 308965
Notes:
1 Outcome here refers to the final disposition of the charge recorded in the court, not whether guilt was determined. For
example, if a person admits an offence and is dealt with by some diversionary action, with the result that the charge is
eventually withdrawn, this would be recorded in this table as a 'not proved' (withdrawn) final outcome. Table 2.1
includes outcomes from charges finalised in the High Court, District Court, and Youth Court.
2 The time periods shown in tables and figures in this report are calendar years.
3 Proved charges involving young offenders that are finalised in the Youth Court, which are not recorded as convictions.
4 Discharge without conviction under section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 or section 106 of the Sentencing Act
2002, after the offender is found guilty or pleads guilty.
5 Charges that were withdrawn, dismissed, discharged, struck out, not proceeded with, or acquitted. This category
includes charges where people completed the Police diversion scheme and subsequently had their charges withdrawn
or dismissed. The data does not distinguish charges which were withdrawn or dismissed because of Police diversion
from other not proved charges.
6 Includes charges where:
• there was a stay of proceedings
• the person was found to be under disability or was acquitted on account of insanity and an order was made under
section 115 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985
• the person was found unfit to stand trial or was acquitted on account of insanity and an order was made under
sections 24 or 25 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003.
Between 2004 and 2006 the number of charges prosecuted increased by 7%, from 287,535
in 2005 to 308,965 in 2006.
A conviction was the most frequent outcome of a prosecution over the decade (see Figure
2.1). However, while the actual number of convictions increased by 8% between 2004 and
1
30
The exact statistical relationship between total levels of victimisation and levels of offending recorded by
Police is complex and is likely to be mediated by a range of technical and social factors For example,
Police and NZCASS 2006 may have classified and counted offences differently, while victims may not
have defined some events as crimes that were subsequently coded as criminal events for the purposes
of NZCASS 2006 (see Mayhew and Reilly 2007: 36).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
2006, from 187,120 to 201,517, the proportion of all prosecutions resulting in a conviction
decreased over the decade. Thus, while 69% of prosecutions resulted in conviction in 1997,
only 65% did so in 2006.
Figure 2.1
Percentage of prosecutions resulting in each type of outcome, 1997 to
2006
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Not proved
Discharge without conviction
Youth Court proved
Convicted
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Children and young people (aged under 17) who offend are dealt with differently by the
criminal justice system compared to those aged 17 years and over. Under the provisions of
the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 (CYPF Act), many of the cases
involving young people are dealt with without a formal court appearance (e.g. by Police Youth
Aid or at a Family Group Conference). In 2006, the number of charges proved in the Youth
Court was 11% higher than in 2004, rising from 6,954 to 7,741.
A person who has been found guilty, or who pleads guilty, may be discharged without a
2
conviction. A discharge of this type is considered an acquittal. Around 2% of all
prosecutions in 2006 resulted in such an outcome, compared with 1% in 1997. The number
of discharges has increased by 71% over the decade (from 3,574 in 1997 to 6,117 in 2006),
with a major increase (51%) recorded in 2004. In 2006, 34% of discharges without conviction
were related to prosecutions for non-imprisonable offences.
In 2006, 30% of all prosecutions resulted in a ‘not proved’ outcome. The number and
proportion of prosecutions resulting in this outcome has exhibited a gradually increasing
2
Prior to 30 June 2002, these discharges were allowed under section 19 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985.
Since this date, discharges without conviction are allowed under section 106 of the Sentencing Act
2002.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
31
trend over the decade. A ‘not proved’ final outcome does not necessarily mean that the court
determined that the defendant was ‘not guilty’. For example, the person may be dealt with
under the Police diversion scheme, which is used for first-time offenders who have committed
less serious offences and who have admitted their guilt. If the offender completes the
requirements successfully, the charge will be withdrawn. This would be recorded in the data
as a ‘not proved’ outcome. Another common situation that results in a ‘not proved’ outcome
is when a charge is withdrawn and replaced with a different charge.
The introduction of status hearings in many parts of the country may also have contributed to
the increase in ‘not proved’ outcomes. Status hearings occur when a ‘not guilty’ plea is
entered for a summarily-laid charge. A judge is required to examine the Police summary of
facts to ensure that the charge is appropriate. If not, this may result in the charge being
amended or withdrawn completely, or the defendant pleading guilty to a reduced charge (for
further information on the outcomes of status hearings see Searle et al. 2004).
Table 2.2 shows the outcome of all criminal prosecutions in 2006 for each type of offence.
Table 2.2
Outcome of all charges prosecuted, by type of offence, 2006
Convicted
Offence type
No.
Violent
17059
Other against persons
4628
Property
47263
Drug
11326
Against justice
23840
Good order
15009
Traffic
63360
Miscellaneous
19032
Total
201517
Youth Court
proved
%
No.
%
Discharge
without
conviction
No.
%
47.8
55.2
57.5
60.7
74.4
61.5
81.3
64.1
65.2
872
153
4786
171
378
516
833
32
7741
2.4
1.8
5.8
0.9
1.2
2.1
1.1
0.1
2.5
1258
221
1355
304
290
779
1312
598
6117
3.5
2.6
1.6
1.6
0.9
3.2
1.7
2.0
2.0
Not proved
No.
%
16387
3365
28666
6858
7483
8067
12423
10021
93270
45.9
40.1
34.9
36.7
23.4
33.1
15.9
33.7
30.2
Other
No.
124
24
73
4
32
19
30
14
320
Total
%
No.
0.3 35700
8391
0.3
0.1 82143
0.0 18663
0.1 32023
0.1 24390
0.0 77958
0.0 29697
0.1 308965
%
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Violent offences were the least likely to result in conviction, with 48% of prosecutions for such
offences resulting in a conviction in 2006. A ‘not proved’ outcome was recorded for 46% of
prosecutions for violent offences. Of these:
•
59% were withdrawn
•
15% were dismissed
•
11% were discharged
•
8% were acquitted
•
7% resulted in some other ‘not proved’ outcome.
In 2006, traffic prosecutions had the highest conviction rate at 81%. This high rate can be
partly attributed to that fact that traffic offenders are significantly more likely to plead guilty
than people prosecuted for other types of offences. For example, in 2006 the defendant
pleaded guilty for 79% of all traffic charges, compared to 70% of offences against the
administration of justice, 66% of drug-related charges, 63% of offences against good order,
and 48% of charges involving violent offences.
32
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Offences against justice and miscellaneous offences had the next highest conviction rates at
74% and 64% respectively (see Table 2.2). In addition, 62% of prosecutions for offences
against good order, 61% of prosecutions for drug offences, 58% of prosecutions for property
offences, 55% of prosecutions for other offences against the person, and 48% of
prosecutions involving violent offences resulted in a conviction in 2006.
2.3
Convictions for offences in each major offence category
Table 2.3 shows the total number of convictions for each category of offence between 1997
and 2006. Table 2.4 and Figure 2.2 show the proportion of all convictions accounted for by
each category of offence. For a description of trends in the number of convictions for
individual offences within each grouped category, see Sections 2.5 to 2.12 below.
Table 2.3
Total number of charges resulting in conviction, by type of offence, 1997
to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
15683 16131 15287 14577 14692 14427 15224 15585 16606 17059
Other against persons
3496
3706
3686
3682
3702
3771
4164
4240
4472
4628
Property
53674 53295 51178 49635 48715 47546 49021 49849 46444 47263
Drug
12997 14168 14021 13649 12555 12272 12359 11643 10923 11326
Against justice
14819 15685 15306 15465 15017 14972 16034 19083 21381 23840
Good order
9918 10527 11030 11579 12389 12839 13987 13938 13343 15009
Traffic
60511 62226 58817 57025 56584 54541 55847 59308 59809 63360
Miscellaneous
9706 10101
9437
7663
9296 10150 13516 13474 14533 19032
Total
180804 185839 178762 173275 172950 170518 180152 187120 187511 201517
Table 2.4
Percentage of all convictions involving each type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
8.7
1.9
29.7
7.2
8.2
5.5
33.5
5.4
100.0
8.7
2.0
28.7
7.6
8.4
5.7
33.5
5.4
100.0
8.6
2.1
28.6
7.8
8.6
6.2
32.9
5.3
100.0
8.4
2.1
28.6
7.9
8.9
6.7
32.9
4.4
100.0
8.5
2.1
28.2
7.3
8.7
7.2
32.7
5.4
100.0
8.5
2.2
27.9
7.2
8.8
7.5
32.0
6.0
100.0
8.5
2.3
27.2
6.9
8.9
7.8
31.0
7.5
100.0
8.3
2.3
26.6
6.2
10.2
7.4
31.7
7.2
100.0
8.9
2.4
24.8
5.8
11.4
7.1
31.9
7.8
100.0
8.5
2.3
23.5
5.6
11.8
7.4
31.4
9.4
100.0
Note:
Due to rounding to one decimal place, not all columns are exactly 100.0%.
Violent offences involve either a direct act of violence against a person or the threat of such
an act. There are a number of other offences that may also involve violent acts or the
intention to commit violent acts, including: sexual offences, rioting, intimidation offences, and
various firearm offences. These other offences have not been included in the violent offence
category for the purposes of this report.
Throughout the decade, violent offences have accounted for 8% to 9% of all convictions (see
Table 2.4). Convictions for this offence category generally showed a decreasing trend
between 1998 and 2002, from 16,131 to 14,427. However, there was a 10% increase in the
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
33
number of convictions for this offence category between 2004 and 2006, from 15,585 to
17,059 (see Table 2.3).
Offences categorised as other offences against the person are mainly offences of obstructing
or resisting Police officers or other officials, and sexual or intimidation offences that are not
included in the violent offence category. The number of convictions for such offences
increased 32% over the decade from 3,496 in 1997 to 4,628 in 2006.
Property offences include burglary, theft, fraud, arson, motor vehicle conversion, receiving
stolen goods, and wilful damage. Property offences represent the second largest group of
offences resulting in conviction after traffic offences. The proportion of all convictions that
involved property offences declined from 30% in 1997 to 24% in 2006.
Table 2.3 shows that the total number of convictions for drug offences generally decreased
from 1999 onwards. Between 2004 and 2006, around 6% of all convictions were for drug
offences, with the figures averaging around 11,000 drug convictions annually. Convictions
for offences involving cannabis comprised nearly three-quarters of all convictions for drug
offences in 2006 (73%), as shown in Table 2.10.
Offences against justice accounted for 12% of all convictions in 2006, compared with 8% in
1997. The increase in convictions in this category may be partly ascribed to a greater level of
enforcement activity (particularly by the Department of Corrections). As Table 2.11
demonstrates, offences against the administration of justice are predominantly for:
•
breach of a sentence imposed for an earlier offence (e.g. breach of community work)
•
breach of a condition of release
•
failure to answer bail (i.e. failure by a person on bail to appear in court at a specified time
and place)
•
the result of breach of a protection order
•
offences relating to court procedure.
Offences against good order include:
•
disorderly behaviour
•
offensive language
•
carrying offensive weapons
•
trespassing
•
unlawful assembly.
Convictions for such offences have generally increased over the decade. In 1997,
convictions for offences against good order accounted for 6% of all convictions, peaking at
8% in 2003. More recently, however, the proportion of all convictions relating to offences
against good order has levelled off at 7%.
34
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Figure 2.2 Percentage of all convictions involving each type of offence, 1997 to
2006
100%
90%
80%
70%
Violent
Other against persons
60%
Property
Drug
50%
Against justice
Good order
40%
Traffic
Miscellaneous
30%
20%
10%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Traffic offences still comprise the largest group of offences resulting in a conviction. The
number of convictions for traffic offences fluctuated over the decade, dropping from 60,511
convictions in 1997 to 54,541 in 2002, before steadily climbing to 63,360 in 2006. The
proportion of all convictions that relate to traffic offences has remained relatively steady over
the decade averaging approximately one third of all convictions each year.
Offences not included in any of the categories discussed above were placed in the category
of ‘miscellaneous offences’. The miscellaneous category contains offences defined in an
assortment of Acts and Regulations, including the following:
•
Arms Act 1983
•
Dog Control Act 1996
•
Fisheries Act 1983
•
Income Tax Act 1994
•
Tax Administration Act 1994
•
Goods and Services Tax Act 1985
•
Postal Services Act 1998
•
Sale of Liquor Act 1989.
Also included in this category are offences that have had no specific code assigned to them
in CMS and therefore cannot be categorised elsewhere.
Various changes to these Acts have led to a fluctuating trend in the total number of
miscellaneous offences, from around 10,000 convictions in 1997 to less than 8,000 in 2000,
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
35
though the number of convictions has climbed steadily since then to around 19,000 in 2006.
Convictions for miscellaneous offences have accounted for an increasing proportion of all
convictions during the decade, climbing from 5% of all convictions in 1997 to 9% in 2006.
2.4
Average seriousness of all offences
An offence seriousness scale was originally developed in 1991 by the Policy and Research
Division of the Department of Justice (see Spier, Luketina, and Kettles 1991). This scale was
revised by the Ministry of Justice in 2005. The revised scale allocates imprisonable offences
a score according to how serious judges have deemed each offence in terms of the use of
custodial sentences over a specific time period. These scores enable offences to be ranked
in terms of their relative seriousness, and can be used to examine whether offending that
leads to a conviction has become more serious over time (i.e. whether there has been an
increase in the number of convictions for more serious offences relative to less serious
offences over time). In addition, it enables changes in the level of seriousness of offences
resulting in imprisonment to be identified.
3
The updated scale is based on court sentencing data for the period 2000 to 2004. The
seriousness score assigned to each offence is the average number of days of imprisonment
imposed on every offender convicted of that offence between 2000 and 2004, where the
average is taken over both imprisoned and non-imprisoned offenders. For example, if
between 2000 and 2004 there were 100 cases of offenders convicted of a particular offence,
and 50 of these cases resulted in a custodial sentence, and the average length of the
custodial sentences imposed on these offenders was 30 days, the seriousness score for this
offence is (30 x 50/100), or 15.
Offences that became obsolete prior to 2000 were given the same score as any new similar
offences, or a score was calculated based on sentencing data before 2000. Imprisonable
offences for which there were convictions but no custodial sentences over the period 2000 to
2004, were given a seriousness rating slightly lower than the least of the offences already
assigned a seriousness score (i.e. a score of 0.2). Non-imprisonable offences were assigned
a seriousness score of zero.
Although seriousness scores are based on judges’ determination of seriousness in terms of
the use of custodial sentences, there is an upper constraint on scores—i.e. the maximum
penalties prescribed in legislation. For example, the highest feasible seriousness score for
an offence with a three-month maximum penalty (assuming everyone convicted was
imprisoned for the maximum term) is 90 (3 x 30 days), whereas for an offence with a
maximum penalty of ten years the highest feasible score is 3650 (10 x 365 days).
3
36
The previous scale was based on court sentencing data for the period 1995 to 1999. The lengths of
custodial sentences imposed between 1995 and 1999 were generally shorter than those imposed
between 2000 and 2004, so the value of the score for the same offence is likely to be higher on the new
scale compared to the old scale. Hence, in general, the average seriousness figures presented in this
report are higher than the comparable figures in earlier reports.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Because each offence has a seriousness score, the seriousness of offence scale can also be
used to compare the seriousness scores of different offences. For example, the seriousness
score for burglary where more than $5,000 worth of goods is stolen is 369, while the score for
rape is 3,012. This means that, on average, judges consider the rape offence to be about
eight times as serious as the burglary offence in terms of sentence imposed. This is quite a
different indication of the relative seriousness of offences than is indicated by maximum
penalties prescribed in legislation. For example, the maximum penalty for burglary is 10
years’ imprisonment, while for rape the maximum penalty is 20 years’ imprisonment.
Table 2.5 and Table 2.6 present information on average seriousness scores for all
convictions. The figures show that the overall average seriousness score for offences
resulting in conviction steadily declined throughout the decade from 46 in 1997 to 40 in 2006.
Table 2.5
Number of convictions with each level of offence seriousness and
average seriousness of all convictions, 1997 to 2006
Seriousness score 1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Non-imprisonable
>0-1
>1-10
>10-50
>50-100
>100-500
>500
Overall average
34291
41849
47982
27850
18975
11793
3099
45
33305
37343
47784
26928
19629
10962
2811
43
35225
33565
45593
24337
20442
11587
2526
43
36289
33925
45511
24618
19798
10251
2558
42
36719
32801
44894
24193
18499
10457
2955
44
40128
34655
47161
25267
19671
10105
3165
43
39935
37428
51390
23141
20734
11643
2849
42
39313
38410
53406
23063
18611
11703
3005
42
44595
41563
58371
23742
18854
11212
3180
40
Note:
33395
40289
44954
27233
19725
12107
3101
46
The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using
the new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
The number of convictions for the most serious offences (with seriousness scores of more
than 500) decreased between 1997 and 2000 (from 3,101 to 2,526), but subsequently
increased by 26% to 3,180 in 2006.
Violent offences have a much higher average seriousness score than the other types of
offences shown in Table 2.6. The average seriousness of violent offences resulting in
conviction has fluctuated around an average of 221 over the decade.
Table 2.6
Average seriousness of convictions, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Note:
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
233
57
56
62
10
3
6
4
236
48
54
54
10
3
7
5
228
39
51
54
10
3
9
7
205
47
53
61
15
3
9
7
212
40
51
58
10
2
9
6
219
37
52
85
10
2
8
5
234
39
50
73
9
3
8
5
214
42
53
73
9
3
8
5
209
39
55
78
9
3
8
5
218
37
51
77
8
3
9
5
The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using
the new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
The average seriousness of charges resulting in conviction for other offences against the
person decreased significantly between 1997 and 1999, and has subsequently remained at a
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
37
lower level. This trend is mainly due to a reduction in the number of convictions for some
non-violent sexual offences after 1997 (see Section 2.6 for more detail).
For drug offences, the average seriousness score has been higher in recent years compared
to earlier years in the decade. This appears to be mainly due to a much greater number of
convictions for dealing in non-cannabis drugs since 2002 (see Section 2.8 for more detail).
Figures for the other offence types reveal little significant change in the average seriousness
rating for offences resulting in conviction between 1997 and 2006.
2.5
Convictions for violent offences
Table 2.7 provides a breakdown of the number of offences resulting in conviction for the
violent offence category. Overall the total number of convictions for violent offences
increased by 9% over the course of the decade, rising from 15,683 in 1997 to 17,059 in 2006.
The number of convictions for murder, manslaughter, and attempted murder fluctuated over
the decade with no clear trend. The number of convictions for kidnapping or abduction
tended to fluctuate from year to year around an annual average of 125 convictions. The
number of convictions for kidnapping or abduction peaked in 2003 figure at 176 convictions,
and has subsequently remained at a lower level.
The total number of convictions for violent sex offences (rape, unlawful sexual connection,
attempted sexual violation, and indecent assault) has averaged around 1,500 convictions
annually. The number of convictions for rape showed a generally decreasing trend between
1997 and 2000 (from 210 to 131). From 2001, the number tended to increase, with 222
convictions for rape in 2006. Convictions for unlawful sexual connection have fluctuated from
year to year although the number generally increased over the decade, from 279 convictions
in 1997 to 414 convictions in 2006. Convictions for attempted sexual violation and indecent
assault reveal a generally decreasing trend during the decade. Section 2.15 provides
information on the age and gender of the victims of violent sex offences that resulted in the
conviction of an offender in 2006.
Aggravated burglary occurs when an offender, while committing a burglary, carries a weapon,
or uses anything as a weapon. There was a 44% reduction in the number of convictions for
such offences over the course of the decade, from 102 in 1997 to 57 in 2006.
Robbery is theft accompanied by violence or the threat of violence. Aggravated robbery
occurs when an offender causes grievous bodily harm immediately before, during, or after a
robbery; commits robbery with at least one other person; or commits robbery while armed
with an offensive weapon. The number of convictions for robbery peaked at 278 convictions
in 1998, dropping to 152 convictions in 2001, before climbing steadily to 273 convictions in
2006. There were 582 convictions for aggravated robbery in 1997. Since then, however, the
number of convictions has been consistently lower, with 433 convictions for this offence in
2006.
38
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.7
Offence type
Number of convictions for violent offences, 1997 to 2006
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Murder
39
24
25
31
19
31
24
27
21
28
Manslaughter1
28
45
28
23
31
30
35
56
21
29
Attempted murder
19
5
6
9
11
16
5
16
5
6
Kidnapping/abduction
112
149
81
106
114
117
176
117
111
169
Rape
210
253
207
131
169
168
213
174
200
222
Unlawful sexual connection
279
349
361
311
384
343
414
338
339
414
Attempted sexual violation
58
56
58
42
59
36
48
42
53
42
Indecent assault
947 1054
968
794
818
957
935
780
874
870
Aggravated burglary2
102
83
77
71
76
67
69
86
87
57
Aggravated robbery
582
555
523
424
366
349
398
388
477
433
Robbery3
258
278
233
170
152
172
207
206
245
273
Grievous assault4
1209 1335 1258 1320 1303 1296 1372 1465 1608 1597
Serious assault5
3031 3239 3090 3247 3364 3341 3458 3807 4098 4335
Male assaults female6
3335 3145 3043 2916 2916 2625 2870 3100 3561 3587
Assault on a child7
298
294
304
280
294
291
253
312
287
269
Minor assault8
4432 4516 4245 3959 3848 3763 3800 3777 3782 3815
Threaten to kill/do GBH9
602
633
641
628
626
697
771
772
698
773
Cruelty to a child10
17
17
40
21
23
19
27
28
20
16
Other violence
125
101
99
94
119
109
149
94
119
124
Total
15683 16131 15287 14577 14692 14427 15224 15585 16606 17059
Notes:
1
Includes convictions for manslaughter that involved the use of a motor vehicle.
2
The definitions of burglary and aggravated burglary were amended in 2003, and the new definitions came into force
on 1 October 2003.
3
Includes both robbery and assault with intent to rob.
4
Mostly assault with a weapon, wounding with intent, and injuring with intent, but also includes aggravated wounding
or injury, disabling, doing a dangerous act with intent, acid throwing, and poisoning with intent to cause grievous
bodily harm. These offences have maximum penalties of at least five years’ imprisonment.
5
Mostly common assault under the Crimes Act 1961, but also includes assault with intent to injure, injuring by an
unlawful act, and aggravated assault (including assault on a Police officer or a person assisting the Police under the
Crimes Act 1961). These offences have maximum penalties of between one and three years’ imprisonment.
6
Offences under section 194(b) of the Crimes Act 1961. These are likely to be mostly domestic-related assaults.
These offences could have been included in the 'serious assault' category as they have a maximum penalty of two
years’ imprisonment. However, they have been presented separately in this report as there is particular interest in
trends in domestic-related assaults. These offences are the best available proxy for such offences, given that the
data does not include information on victim-offender relationships that would allow domestic-related assaults to be
identified more accurately.
7
Assault on a child under the age of 14 years under section 194(a) of the Crimes Act 1961.
8
Mostly common assault under the Summary Offences Act 1981, but also includes assault on a Police or prison
officer, or a person assisting the Police under the same Act. These offences have a maximum penalty of six months’
imprisonment.
9
Threaten to kill or do grievous bodily harm.
10
Offences under section 195 of the Crimes Act 1961.
The number of convictions in the two most serious categories of assault – grievous assault
and serious assault – showed almost identical trends over the decade, slowly increasing
between 1997 and 2006. In 2006, these offences collectively accounted for 35% of all
convictions for violent offences, compared to 27% in 1997.
Convictions for male assaults female (under section 194(b) of the Crimes Act 1961 – the
majority of which were domestic-related assaults) decreased between 1997 and 2002, before
increasing by 30% between 2002 and 2006. The number of convictions for assaults on
children aged less than 14 years (under section 194(a) of the Crimes Act 1961) was
generally stable for the decade, averaging around 288 convictions per annum.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
39
Convictions for minor assault comprised around one-quarter of all convictions for violent
offences. The number of convictions for this offence decreased slowly over the decade,
dropping from 4,432 convictions in 1997 to 3,815 convictions in 2006. Convictions for
threatening to kill or do grievous bodily harm have shown an upward trend, increasing from
602 in 1997 to 773 in 2006.
2.6
Convictions for other offences against the person
Table 2.8 shows the number of convictions for other offences against the person. Between
1997 and 2006, the total number of convictions for this offence category increased by 32%
from 3,496 to 4,628. The number of convictions for non-violent sexual offences declined
between 1997 and 2001. However, since 2002 the number of convictions for this category
steadily increased, from 447 in 2002 to 610 in 2006.
Convictions for obstructing or resisting a Police officer or other official accounted for over half
of all convictions for other offences against the person. These figures have fluctuated,
generally averaging 2,400 convictions each year between 1997 and 2005. In 2006, there
were 2,718 convictions for this offence category. This represented a 6% increase from 2005
and was the highest level recorded during the decade.
Table 2.8
Number of convictions for other offences against the person, 1997 to
2006
Offence type
1
Non-violent sexual
Obstruct/resist2
Intimidation3
Other against persons
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
579
2269
466
182
3496
492
2493
477
244
3706
474
2405
549
258
3686
495
2376
560
251
3682
415
2289
618
380
3702
447
2377
653
294
3771
468
2556
772
368
4164
453
2553
933
301
4240
573
2574
1097
228
4472
610
2718
1082
218
4628
Notes:
1 Mainly unlawful sexual intercourse or committing an indecent act with or upon another person, committing an indecent
act in a public place, or obscene exposure in a public place. Sex offences reported in the violent offence category are
not included in the figures for this category.
2 Obstructing or resisting a Police officer, traffic officer, or other official.
3 Mostly offences under section 21 of the Summary Offences Act 1981. Excludes threatening to kill or do grievous
bodily harm, which have been classified in this report as a violent offence.
The number of convictions for intimidation offences (that do not involve a threat to kill or do
grievous bodily harm) increased by 132% over the decade. Although a new offence of
threats of harm to people or property (section 307A Crimes Act 1961) came into force in
November 2003 and is included in this category, there were no convictions for this new
offence in 2003 or 2004, while only 1 conviction was recorded for 2005, and 5 convictions in
2006. The increase in this category has therefore been principally due to a growth in
convictions for other offences included in the intimidation category.
The number of convictions for ‘other’ offences in this offence group fluctuated over the
decade, peaking at 380 in 2001. The particularly high number of convictions in 2001 was
partly due to 82 convictions for misconduct in respect of human remains (i.e. interfering with
graves or human remains). There are usually very few convictions for this type of offence,
with just one conviction in 2005 and none recorded in 2006.
40
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
2.7
Convictions for property offences
Table 2.9 shows the total number of convictions for property offences. Between 1997 and
2006, convictions for all property offences decreased by 12% from 53,674 to 47,263.
Most of the decrease in property offences over the decade was due to a decline in the
number of convictions for fraud. In 1997, there were over 18,000 convictions for fraud;
however, in 2005 and 2006 the annual number of fraud convictions averaged around 11,000.
This finding does not necessarily indicate that there has been a reduction in the number of
individuals committing fraud. Many offenders convicted of fraud face a vast number of
charges. Consequently, the total number of fraud charges could change considerably
without the number of people being convicted of fraud altering substantially. As Table 3.18 in
the following chapter shows, the number of cases where the most serious offence was fraud
only declined by about 900 cases between 1997 and 2006.
Table 2.9
Number of convictions for property offences, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud2
Arson
Wilful damage3
Other property4
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
6719 6374 5938 6339 5502 5711 5424 6398 6481 6087
13208 13793 13720 13246 14145 13921 14269 14276 14170 14644
3084 3374 3000 3010 2827 2437 2611 2729 2509 2683
2793 2538 2431 2173 2053 2093 2130 2110 1967 2127
18661 17124 15078 14394 14220 12765 13629 13550 11078 10770
198
313
209
170
198
213
212
219
238
209
4800 5087 5156 5232 5065 5103 5285 5551 5802 6724
4211 4692 5646 5071 4705 5303 5461 5016 4199 4019
53674 53295 51178 49635 48715 47546 49021 49849 46444 47263
Notes:
1 The definition of burglary was amended in 2003, and the new definition came into force on 1 October 2003.
2 Includes fraud, false pretences, forgery, and crimes involving deceit. The Crimes Amendment Act 2003 removed any
references to ‘fraud’ from the Crimes Act 1961 and inserted sections referring to 'crimes involving deceit'.
3 Includes intentional damage under section 269 of the Crimes Act 1961 and wilful damage under section 11 of the
Summary Offences Act 1981.
4 Mostly unlawfully interfering with or getting into/onto a motor vehicle or motorcycle, misleading a social welfare officer,
providing misleading information to obtain a benefit/finance, possessing instruments for burglary or conversion, and
unlawfully taking a bicycle.
The number of convictions for burglary fluctuated over the decade. However, there was a
generally declining trend for this offence category between 1997 and 2003.
Convictions for theft comprised over one-quarter of all convictions for property offences
between 1997 and 2006. Convictions for theft have generally increased over the period,
rising from 13,208 in 1997 to 14,644 in 2006.
Convictions for receiving stolen property averaged approximately 3,100 annually between
1997 and 2000. In the latter half of the decade, however, the annual average declined to
about 2,600 convictions.
The number of convictions for motor vehicle conversion averaged about 2,700 in 1997 and
1998, but between 2001 and 2006 the annual average declined by 22% to 2,100.
Apart from an exceptionally high figure in 1998 (313), the number of convictions for arson
averaged around 220 annually.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
41
The number of convictions for wilful damage shows a steady upward trend over the decade.
Between 1997 and 2004, the figures averaged around 5,100 convictions annually. In 2005
and 2006, there were 5,800 and 6,700 convictions for this offence category respectively.
The number of convictions for offences classified as ‘other property offences’ generally
fluctuated over the decade, although between 2003 and 2006 the number of convictions for
this offence declined by 26% from 5,461 to 4,019. Between 1999 and 2003, the number of
convictions was generally higher, peaking at 5,646 in 1999. The higher level of convictions
during this period can be partly attributed to an increase in convictions under section 127 of
the Social Security Act 1964 (which relates to making a false statement or misleading an
officer in relation to a benefit or other entitlement).
2.8
Convictions for drug offences
Table 2.10 shows a generally decreasing trend over the decade for the number of convictions
relating to drug offences. The figures declined from an average around 13,500 convictions
annually in the first half of the decade to around 11,000 convictions in the second half of the
decade.
Table 2.10 Number of convictions for drug offences, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
Use cannabis
Deal in cannabis
Other cannabis1
Use other drug
Deal in other drug
Other drug1
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
6459
3708
1730
444
496
160
12997
6970
3977
2172
412
415
222
14168
6761
3916
2255
493
405
191
14021
6131
3884
2186
676
459
313
13649
5541
3589
2183
544
403
295
12555
4988
3305
2072
668
772
467
12272
4856
3125
2240
733
631
774
12359
4279
2675
2093
851
575
1170
11643
4040
2189
1942
808
610
1334
10923
4121
2196
1933
1030
660
1386
11326
Note:
1 Most of offences in these categories relate to the possession of pipes, needles, syringes or other drug-related utensils.
These categories also include offences where the offender permitted his or her premises or motor vehicle to be used
for a drug offence, or where the offender made a false statement in relation to the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975.
Since 2002, convictions for cannabis offences have declined as a proportion of all drug
convictions. Between 1997 and 2001 the proportion of drug offences relating to cannabis
ranged between 89% and 93%. However, in 2006 only 73% of drug convictions were
cannabis related. New Zealand Police have partly attributed this reduction to an increase in
the market for methamphetamine and other drugs and have noted that the number of
apprehensions for “new drugs” offences (which include offences involving
4
methamphetamine) increased by 29% since 2004 (New Zealand Police 2003, 2005).
The category ‘use cannabis’ includes the use of cannabis and possession of cannabis other
than for supply. The number of convictions for using cannabis has steadily tracked
downward since 1998.
4
42
A new offence class was introduced by New Zealand Police in 2003 to specifically capture offences
under the Misuse of Drugs Act (1975) where the drugs involved included: methamphetamine,
amphetamine, ecstasy and fantasy-type substances.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Convictions for importing, exporting, producing, manufacturing, supplying, administering,
selling, cultivating, or possessing for supply controlled drugs are categorised in this report as
dealing offences. As was the case for using offences, the number of convictions for dealing
in cannabis has generally demonstrated a downward trend since 1998. Of the 2,196
convictions for dealing in cannabis in 2006:
•
58% involved cultivating cannabis
•
21% involved possession of cannabis for supply
•
17% involved selling/supplying cannabis
•
4% involved other forms of dealing.
Convictions for other cannabis offences (not including using or dealing) increased between
1997 and 1999 (from 1,730 to 2,255), but have stabilised since then, averaging around 2,100
convictions annually. The vast majority of offences in this category relate to possession of
drug-related utensils for cannabis use.
Convictions for the possession or use (other than for supply) of drugs other than cannabis
increased by 132% over the decade, rising from 444 in 1997 to 1,030 in 2006. Within this
offence, the number of convictions for the possession or use of stimulants or depressants
doubled from 72 in 1997 to 322 in 2002. However, by 2006 the number decreased to 74.
This decline was predominantly due to a change in Police offence coding practice in 2003,
which removed convictions for using methamphetamine (speed) or amphetamine from the
stimulants or depressants category and placed them in a separate offence category.
The number of convictions for dealing in drugs other than cannabis averaged around 540
convictions annually during the period. There was a significant rise in 2002 when the number
increased to 772. Since then the figures have ranged from 575 to 660 convictions per
annum. The number of convictions for dealing in stimulants or depressants increased from
28 in 1997 to a peak of 334 in 2003. Since then the number has declined. As noted above,
this decline is largely due to the removal of convictions for dealing in methamphetamine or
amphetamine from the stimulants or depressants category from 1 June 2003 onwards.
In 2006, there were 333 convictions for dealing in methamphetamine or amphetamine. New
Zealand Police have recorded a slow, but steady, increase in the number of clandestine
methamphetamine/amphetamine laboratories detected since 2003, following dramatic
increases in 1999 and 2002. In 2006, 211 clandestine laboratories were detected and
dismantled by Police. This represented a 3% increase from 2005, and was the highest
5
number of laboratories ever detected in a single year.
The number of convictions for ‘other drug’ offences has increased dramatically in recent
years. Between 2004 and 2006, convictions for this type of offence increased by 79%, rising
5
See Newton, A. (2007) 2006 Clandestine Drug Laboratory (Clan Lab) Report. Wellington: New Zealand
Police (http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2007/clandestine-drug-lab/2006-clan-lab-report.html,
accessed on October 29 2007).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
43
from 774 convictions in 2003 to 1,386 in 2006. This increase can be mostly ascribed to a rise
in the number of convictions for offences involving possession of utensils or equipment
capable of producing or cultivating non-cannabis drugs.
2.9
Convictions for offences against the administration of justice
The biggest increase in convictions for offences against the administration of justice has
occurred since 2003 (see Table 2.11). Changes in the number of prosecutions and
convictions for offences against justice were likely to have been affected by:
•
increases in number of offences
•
changes in enforcement activity
•
changes in recording practices
•
the impact of the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Parole Act 2002.
The Sentencing Act 2002 changed the types of community-based sentences that may be
imposed (see Section 3.2, Sentencing legislation, for further details) and consequently the
types of sentences that may be breached. To enable conviction trends for these types of
offences to be more easily analysed, Table 2.11 includes a subtotal for breaches of all ‘workrelated’ community sentences. Convictions for the breach of a work-related community
sentence comprised between 40% and 52% of convictions for offences against the
administration of justice over the decade. There was a decrease in the number of
convictions for breaching work-related community sentences between 1998 and 2003,
followed by a 63% increase from 6,485 convictions in 2003 to 10,593 in 2006.
The number of convictions for breaching the conditions of a supervision sentence increased
by 87% over the decade, rising from 634 in 1997 to 1,185 in 2006.
The number of convictions for breaching the conditions of release from prison increased
considerably across the decade. In 2006, the number of convictions for this offence type was
1,427, which was approximately eight times higher than the corresponding figure for 1997.
The substantial increase in recent years is likely to be related to changes to the provisions
related to release conditions under the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Parole Act 2002, which
introduced release conditions for offenders sentenced to short-term prison sentences (of 24
months or less) from June 30 2002. Previously under the Criminal Justice Act 1985,
offenders that were sentenced to short sentences (12 months or less) were not released
subject to conditions.
The number of convictions for failure to answer bail has increased by 84% through the
decade, growing from 3,959 in 1997 to 7,263 in 2006.
Non-molestation orders were replaced by protection orders when the Domestic Violence Act
1995 commenced on 1 July 1996. The number of breaches of protection orders increased
between 1997 and 1999 (from 1,223 to 2,117). Since then, the number has stabilised
somewhat, averaging around 2,250 convictions annually.
44
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.11
Offence type
Number of convictions for offences against the administration of justice,
1997 to 2006
1997
Breach community
work1,2
Breach periodic
7318
detention3
Breach community
326
service4
Subtotal - breach
7644
work-related5
Breach supervision
634
Breach conditions of
180
release6
7
Failure to answer bail
3959
Breach protection/
non-molestation
1223
order8
Escape custody9
380
Obstruct/pervert
155
course of justice
Other against justice
644
Total
14819
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
-
-
-
-
522
5251
7925
9064
10518
7532
7011
6623
6257
5551
1090
340
130
65
282
220
246
219
277
144
28
16
10
7814
7231
6869
6476
6350
6485
8293
9210
10593
601
553
502
577
500
566
744
1062
1185
202
199
235
267
309
567
939
1241
1427
4013
4124
4285
4307
4393
5104
5745
6220
7263
1881
2117
2257
2360
2027
2254
2264
2381
2249
424
406
372
292
285
332
322
370
340
152
132
143
115
128
149
174
205
182
598
15685
544
15306
802
15465
623
15017
980
14972
577
16034
602
19083
692
21381
601
23840
Notes:
1 A dash (-) indicates that the offence was not legislated for in that particular time period.
2 Community work was introduced on 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
3 The sentence of periodic detention was abolished by the Sentencing Act 2002 from 30 June 2002.
4 The sentence of community service was abolished by the Sentencing Act 2002 from 30 June 2002.
5 Subtotal of breaches of community work, periodic detention, and community service.
6 Failure, without reasonable excuse, to comply with any condition of release from prison. In reports prior to 2003, this
was called 'breach of parole'.
7 Failure by a person on bail to appear in court at a specified time and place.
8 Non-molestation orders were replaced by protection orders under the Domestic Violence Act 1995.
9 Mostly escaping from custody in a penal institution, or escaping from Police custody. Also includes a small number of
charges of escaping custody from some other type of institution such as a psychiatric hospital.
Convictions for escaping from custody made up a small proportion of all convictions for
offences against the administration of justice, accounting for an average of 2% of convictions
per annum over the decade. Convictions for this offence have fluctuated during the period,
revealing no clear trend.
The number of convictions for obstructing or perverting the course of justice has shown a
generally upward trend over the decade. The figures averaged around 139 convictions
annually in the first half of the decade, compared to an average of 168 convictions per annum
in the second half.
Convictions for other offences against justice have fluctuated from year to year, revealing no
obvious trend.
2.10 Convictions for offences against good order
Convictions for rioting comprised less than 1% of all offences against good order between
1997 and 2005. There were no convictions for such offences in 2006. Convictions for rioting
have fluctuated from year to year with no clear trend (see Table 2.12).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
45
Table 2.12 Number of convictions for offences against good order, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Riot
Unlawful assembly
Possess offensive weapon
Offensive language
Disorderly behaviour1
Trespassing
Other against good order
Total
7
2
5
23
15
6
4
15
3
0
69
40
21
23
17
30
53
72
51
34
1259 1417 1417 1310 1444 1537 1650 1780 1955 2285
598
650
699
681
645
581
551
493
386
420
4661 5130 5645 6149 6933 7151 8114 7968 7451 8592
2997 3028 3006 3135 3092 3288 3393 3400 3307 3466
327
260
237
258
243
246
222
210
190
212
9918 10527 11030 11579 12389 12839 13987 13938 13343 15009
Note:
1 Mostly behaving in a disorderly or offensive manner (section 4 Summary Offences Act 1981), disorderly or threatening
behaviour (section 3 Summary Offences Act 1981), and fighting in a public place (section 7 Summary Offences Act
1981).
The number of convictions for unlawful assembly has fluctuated over the decade. The
figures averaged around 38 convictions annually except for 2004, when there were 72
convictions.
Convictions for the possession of an offensive weapon offence have increased by 82% over
the decade, rising from 1,259 in 1997 to 2,285 in 2006.
Prior to 2004, convictions for offensive language (under section 4 of the Summary Offences
Act 1981) averaged around 630 convictions annually. The figures decreased in more recent
years, with 420 convictions for this offence recorded in 2006. This decline may be due to
changing Police and judicial attitudes to what constitutes offensive language.
Convictions for disorderly behaviour comprised over half of all convictions for offences
against good order between 1999 and 2006. The figures have nearly doubled over the
decade, increasing from 4,661 in 1997 to 8,592 in 2006. This increase may be related to
changes in Police practice, such as increased enforcement activity. A reduction of the
purchasing age for alcohol may also partly explain this increase. In an earlier Ministry of
Justice publication, Lash (2005) examined trends in disorderly behaviour by young people
before and after the purchasing age for alcohol was lowered in 1999 from 20 to 18. She
found that:
The number of disorderly behaviour offences committed by those aged under 18
years, and those aged between 18 and 19 years, increased after the changes to the
Sale of Liquor Act 1989. However, disorderly behaviour offences also increased for
older age groups – possibly due to changes in Police practice. For those aged under
18 years, the increase in disorderly behaviour offending was similar to increases in
other age groups. For those aged between 18 and 19 years, the increase in 2000
was slightly greater than that for older age groups, although in the last four years the
rate of increase has declined relative to other age groups (Lash 2005: 33).
2.11
Convictions for traffic offences
Table 2.13 demonstrates that the number of convictions for traffic offences declined by 12%
between 1998 and 2002. Several interventions introduced by the Land Transport Act 1998
may explain this decline, for example:
46
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
•
photo driver’s licences
•
the power for the Police to forbid unlicensed drivers from driving until they get a valid
licence
•
the power for the Police to impound vehicles driven by disqualified or unlicensed drivers.
These interventions, together with ongoing advertising and enforcement campaigns by Land
Transport New Zealand (previously the Land Transport Safety Authority) and the Police
targeted at reducing drink-driving and speeding, may have contributed to the decline in traffic
convictions between 1998 and 2002.
From 2003 onwards, the number of convictions for this type of offence has steadily
increased. In 2006, there were 66,360 convictions for traffic offences, the highest level
recorded in the last ten years.
Table 2.13 shows that the number of convictions for driving offences resulting in the death or
injury of another person decreased between 1998 and 2002, before returning to the level
recorded in 1998 in 2006.
Table 2.13 Number of convictions for traffic offences, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
Driving causing death or
injury1
Driving with excess
alcohol2
Driving while disqualified
Reckless/dangerous
driving
Careless driving
Other traffic
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
1556
1679
1575
1446
1422
1403
1528
1572
1631
1675
24672 24819 23101 21601 22363 20811 21078 22589 23061 24240
10746 11605 10451
2611
2881
2939
7862
7399
6861
7036
7734
8017
8787
2691
2773
3014
3468
4226
4625
5084
9639 10248 9177 8417 7961 8248 7529 7481 7654 7441
11287 10994 11574 15008 14666 14204 15208 15706 14821 16133
60511 62226 58817 57025 56584 54541 55847 59308 59809 63360
Notes:
1 Charges involving driving with excess alcohol, reckless or dangerous driving, or careless driving where death or injury
occurred. It is no longer possible to distinguish in the data between charges resulting in injury and charges resulting in
death. A small number of people who kill a person while driving a motor vehicle will be charged with manslaughter
rather than driving causing death.
2 Mostly charges where the person was driving with excess alcohol, but also includes charges where the offender
refused to supply a blood specimen or was convicted for driving under the influence of drink or drugs. Charges where
a person was driving with excess alcohol and caused death or injury are included in the first category in this table.
Convictions for driving with excess alcohol represented over one-third of all convictions for
traffic offences between 1997 and 2006. The number of convictions for driving with excess
alcohol showed a decreasing trend between 1997 and 2002. However, from 2002 onwards,
the number rose, and between 2002 and 2006 increased by 17% from 20,811 to 24,240.
The number of convictions for driving while disqualified dropped between 1999 and 2000,
from 10,451 to 7,862. Since then, the number of these convictions has fluctuated at the
lower level, with an annual average of approximately 7,600. Between 1997 and 2006,
convictions for this offence declined by 18% from 10,746 to 8,787. It is possible that this
decrease can be partly attributed to the introduction of the Land Transport Act 1998. Under
this Act, it became possible for Police to impound vehicles being driven by disqualified
drivers, thus potentially making it more difficult for such drivers to re-offend.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
47
Convictions for reckless or dangerous driving increased by 95% over the decade from 2,611
in 1997 to 5,084 in 2006, with a 69% increase recorded between 2003 and 2006. This
increase can be ascribed, in part, to the introduction of the Land Transport (Unauthorised
Street and Drag Racing) Amendment Act in May 2003, which explicitly criminalised street
and drag racing behaviours for the first time.
There has been a downward trend in the number of careless driving convictions over the
decade (from around 10,000 convictions in 1997 and 1998 to around 7,500 convictions in
recent years).
The number of convictions for other traffic offences increased considerably between 1999
and 2000 (from 11,574 to 15,008) and has generally remained at this higher level. Within this
category, the number of convictions for failing to comply with a prohibition of an enforcement
officer under section 52(1)(c) of the Land Transport Act 1998 increased from 101 in 1998 to
2,288 in 1999, then almost tripled, reaching 6,568 in 2000. In 2006, 4,412 of the convictions
in this category related to unlicensed drivers failing to comply with a prohibition to drive. The
Land Transport Act 1998 gave Police new powers to issue a notice to unlicensed drivers or
drivers with expired licences that forbids them from driving until they obtain a licence or
renew their licence. It is likely that a large number of the offences of failing to comply with a
prohibition of an enforcement officer arose when such drivers were caught driving while the
disqualification notice was still in effect.
2.12 Convictions for miscellaneous offences
For the purposes of this report, offences not included in one of the previously discussed
categories were placed in the miscellaneous offence category. Each offence type within this
category will be discussed in this section.
The number of convictions under the Arms Act 1983 peaked in 1998 at 952, before
decreasing to 705 in 2001 (see Table 2.14). However, between 2002 and 2005 the number
of convictions then increased to a level similar that found in 1997. Between 2005 and 2006,
the number of convictions for this offence increased by a further 20%, rising from 846 to
1,015.
The Dog Control Act 1996 replaced the Dog Control and Hydatids Act 1982 on 1 July 1996.
Convictions under the Dog Control Act 1996 decreased by over 80% over the decade, from
1,600 in 1997 to around 300 in 2006. This was principally due to the offence of failing to
register a dog being reclassified as an infringement offence (although it can still be
proceeded against summarily).
Between 1997 and 2006, the proportion of miscellaneous offences involving tax-related
offences increased from 26% to 40%. The number of convictions for tax-related offences
averaged 2,300 convictions per annum between 1997 and 2000, and then increased to
around 5,000 prior to 2006. In 2006, there were 7,510 convictions for tax-related offences.
This represents a 25% increase from 2005. The majority of these convictions related to
failing to provide information (including tax returns and tax forms) to the Commissioner of
Inland Revenue, and failing to furnish an income tax or GST return.
48
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.14 Number of convictions for miscellaneous offences, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1
Arms Act
Dog Control Act2
Tax Act3
Liquor-related4
Fisheries Act5
Other miscellaneous6
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
880
1641
2471
957
319
3438
9706
952
885
2464
1200
714
3886
10101
921
592
2105
1181
455
4183
9437
857
432
2269
223
750
3132
7663
705
491
3773
190
762
3375
9296
737
346
4161
251
719
3936
10150
808
551
5313
1242
792
4810
13516
884
286
5181
3221
847
3055
13474
846
347
5994
2927
623
3796
14533
1015
305
7510
4821
496
4885
19032
Notes:
1 Excludes a small number of offences prosecuted under this Act which were categorised in this report as violent
offences or other offences against the person.
2 The Dog Control Act 1996, which came into force on 1 July 1996, replaced the Dog Control and Hydatids Act 1982.
3 Offences under the Income Tax Act 1976, the Income Tax Act 1994, the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985, or the Tax
Administration Act 1994.
4 Includes convictions under the Sale of Liquor Act 1962 and the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 (from 1 April 1990), as well as
convictions under section 38(3) of the Summary Offences Act 1981 (minors drinking in a public place) and, from April
2003, convictions for breaches of local liquor bans under section 709A (8) of the Local Government Act 1974.
5 This category includes convictions under the Fisheries Act 1983 and related regulations, e.g. commercial fishing
regulations and freshwater fisheries regulations.
6 Includes a wide variety of offences such as breaches under: the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992, the
Insolvency Act 1967, the Resource Management Act 1991, the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act
1993, the Building Act 1991, the Telecommunications Act 1987, the Medicines Act 1981, and the Conservation Act
1987.
The number of liquor-related convictions dropped from 1,181 in 1999 to 223 in 2000. It
remained at this lower level in 2001 and 2002, but increased considerably after 2003. The
2006 figure (4,821) was five times higher than the corresponding figure for 1997 (957).
The drop in liquor-related offences between 1999 and 2000 may be attributed – at least in
part – to amendments made to the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 and section 38 of the Summary
Offences Act 1981, which came into force on 1 December 1999. These amendments
changed a number of liquor-related offences involving minors to infringement offences
(although they can still be proceeded against summarily), including: offences involving
purchasing of liquor by minors; minors being found in restricted or supervised areas; and
minors drinking liquor in a public place The amendments also lowered the legal alcohol
purchasing age from 20 to 18 years, thereby altering the definition of a minor under this Act
to someone under the age of 18. Following the introduction of this legislation, liquor-related
offences involving minors decreased substantially from 1,027 in 1999 to 144 in 2000.
The increase in liquor-related offences in recent years has mostly been due to an increase in
the number of convictions for breaches of local liquor bans. Between 2004 and 2006,
convictions for local liquor ban breaches increased by 55%, from 2,971 to 4,603 in 2006.
Prior to the introduction of a new offence code in April 2003, these offences were
incorporated within the category of other miscellaneous offences and the exact number of
convictions for this offence type could not be identified.
Convictions under the Fisheries Act 1983 and related regulations increased from 455 in 1999
to 750 in 2000. The number has tended to increase slightly each subsequent year, although
the number fell between 2004 and 2006.
The category of other miscellaneous offences incorporates a wide variety of offences,
including breaches under the following Acts: Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992,
Insolvency Act 1967, Resource Management Act 1991, Films, Videos, and Publications
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
49
Classification Act 1993, Building Act 1991, Telecommunications Act 1987, Medicines Act,
and Conservation Act 1987. The number of convictions within this category fluctuated
around an average of 3,850 during the decade.
2.13 Courts where convictions were finalised in 2006
Table 2.15 shows the total number of convictions for each type of offence finalised in each
court area in 2006. The information presented in Table 2.15 is charge-based. The table
excludes convictions finalised in the Court of Appeal and the Youth Court. In locations where
there is both a District and High Court, the conviction figures from the two courts have been
6
combined. Of the 201,517 convictions in 2006, 198,057 (98%) were finalised in a District
Court, and 3,358 (2%) were finalised in a High Court. The table excludes four charges where
locations are unknown.
Some charges must be tried before a jury if the defendant pleads not guilty. Others can be
tried before a judge alone, but the defendant can elect a jury trial. The least serious charges
must be tried before a judge alone. If a person is charged with an offence that must be tried
by a jury or elects to have their case tried by a jury, but the closest court does not hold jury
trials (e.g. Levin District Court), the case will be transferred to another court that holds such
trials. For this reason, some of the more serious offences committed in locations such as
Levin will appear in another court’s figures.
Due to the small totals, Chatham Islands, Whataroa and Kaikoura have not been used for
comparison with other locations.
The figures show that Auckland finalised the highest total number of convicted charges,
processing 21,356 out of a total of 201,517 convictions in 2006. Other key trends for
convictions for each type of offence in 2006 were as follows:
50
•
The proportion of convictions that involved violence in each court ranged from 2% in
Warkworth to 13% in Hawera and Wanganui. The national average was 8%.
•
Charges involving other offences against the person accounted for 6% of convictions in
Gore, compared to 1% of convictions in Manukau, Pukekohe, Waihi, Marton, Dannevirke,
Rangiora, Ashburton, and Balclutha. The national average in 2006 was 2%.
•
The proportion of convictions that involved property offences ranged from 31% in
Balclutha to 9% in Ruatoria, Waipukurau and Queenstown. Nationally, 23% of convicted
charges involved property offences.
6
As noted in Chapter 1, CMS records information on appeals in a different way to LES. One of the
changes in CMS is that for charges finalised in the Court of Appeal, the final court is recorded as the
Court of Appeal, whereas on LES, the final court was the court where the charge was initially finalised.
Charges finalised in the Court of Appeal have been excluded from Table 2.15.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.15 Courts where convictions were finalised, by type of offence, 20061,2
Violent
Other
against Property
persons
Court
No.
%
No. %
No.
%
Kaitaia
142
11
259
12
32 3
50 2
244
Kaikohe*
494
Whangarei*
468
9
Dargaville
71
11
126 2
14 2
Warkworth
14
2
Auckland*
1861
9
2 0
549 3
Waitakere
599
7
North Shore
376
5
Manukau*
1414
8
Papakura
269
9
Pukekohe
165
8
Thames
66
6
Huntly
87
11
Waihi
67
5
Morrinsville
52
6
970
9
28
5
Tauranga*
608
7
Whakatane
193
8
Opotiki
54
8
Ruatoria
18
11
Tokoroa
145
10
Rotorua*
519
9
Te Kuiti
46
8
Taupo
157
8
Gisborne*
346
9
Wairoa
42
8
Taumaranui
63
11
532
12
Taihape
37
9
Napier*
447
9
Hastings
237
6
Hawera
202
13
Wanganui*
357
13
Marton
30
6
Waipukurau
19
5
Dannevirke
23
6
Feilding
44
Palmerston
North*
420
Levin
Masterton
Against
justice
Drug
No.
%
No.
%
20
72
6
161
22
169
8
357
1336
25
502
9
139
22
27
133
21
Miscellaneous
Traffic
Total
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
13
67
5
478
38
54
4
1250
100
16
110
5
721
32
80
4
2240
100
557
10
479
9
1629
30
264
5
5361
100
4
68
11
37
6
251
41
12
2
619
100
70
11
49
8
30
5
301
48
25
4
624
100
8
2147
10
21356
100
7
1273
30 2187
34 338
4
9178
100
200 2
149 2
2336
21 1632
25 607
1898
24
422
5
885
11
461
6
2794
35
998
13
7983
100
237 1
100 3
3698
21
422
2
2438
14
743
4
4952
19
17235
100
742
24
101
3
588
19
197
6
1042
29 3331
72
33
2
3111
100
29 1
19 2
583
28
77
4
176
8
114
5
943
45
22
1
2109
100
241
22
108
10
107
10
58
5
426
39
74
7
1099
100
12 2
20 1
98
12
33
4
52
7
30
4
398
51
77
10
787
100
169
12
76
5
82
6
96
7
333
23
610
42
1453
100
204
22
55
6
72
8
57
6
430
46
44
5
933
100
2925
27
626
6
1511
14
731
7
2770
11
10941
100
179
29
24
4
44
7
30
5
251
25 1183
44
41
7
619
100
2146
26
373
5
959
12
661
8
2747
33
606
7
8259
100
57 2
15 2
620
25
149
6
296
12
167
7
821
34
132
5
2435
100
164
25
60
9
99
15
47
7
179
28
32
5
650
100
7 4
35 2
14
9
15
10
18
11
14
9
62
39
9
6
157
100
319
21
144
10
155
10
146
10
482
32
68
5
1494
100
100 2
10 2
1198
22
311
6
787
14
447
8
1620
30
500
9
5482
100
73
13
49
9
55
10
26
5
244
44
57
10
560
100
55 3
81 2
362
18
141
7
199
10
209
10
680
34
205
10
2008
100
894
22
199
5
686
17
399
25
435
11
4051
100
17 3
27 5
86
17
57
11
40
8
45
10 1011
208
9
40
21
4
516
100
99
18
28
5
76
13
43
8
221
39
7
1
564
100
116 3
13 3
843
19
219
5
826
19
365
8
1149
26
376
8
4426
100
84
20
31
8
22
5
20
5
181
44
25
6
413
100
125 3
98 2
1186
25
335
7
503
10
420
9
1385
29
399
8
4800
100
968
23
197
5
535
13
361
9
1602
38
197
5
4195
100
51 3
95 3
358
23
82
5
211
14
102
7
455
29
92
6
1553
100
648
23
145
5
393
14
192
7
904
32
109
4
2843
100
5 1
7 2
88
19
15
3
30
6
30
6
259
56
9
2
466
100
35
9
30
7
48
12
20
5
191
47
58
14
408
100
105
26
27
7
53
13
23
6
166
40
10
2
411
100
6
4 1
12 2
144
21
36
5
67
10
42
6
331
47
21
3
697
100
8
92 2
1261
25
251
5
527
11
377
8
1563
32
461
9
4952
100
129
8
24
67
4
183
11
96
6
672
40
80
5
1663
100
10
38 2
84 4
398
223
431
19
103
4
287
12
199
9
676
29
296
13
2299
100
Porirua
335
9
823
22
142
4
444
12
227
6
1426
37
337
9
3819
100
Upper Hutt
146
10
85 2
37 2
301
20
67
4
240
16
121
8
493
33
108
7
1513
100
Lower Hutt
337
8
941
23
141
3
624
15
252
6
1311
32
429
10
4141
100
Wellington*
883
12
106 3
212 3
1861
25
415
6
762
10
587
8
1609
22 1059
14
7388
100
4
11
2 5
3
8
0
0
4
11
1
3
23
1
3
38
100
Hamilton*
Te Awamutu
New Plymouth*
Chatham
Islands
19 2
225 2
19 3
159 2
4591
Good
order
10 2055
14 739
10 6334
8 3086
61
Continued next page
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
51
Violent
Other
against Property
persons
Court
No.
%
No. %
No.
%
No.
Nelson*
355
9
22
190
9
88 2
85 4
920
Blenheim*
502
24
Westport
40
9
99
Greymouth*
81
8
17 4
44 4
8
9
1303
8
Rangiora
44
4
Whataroa
0
0
Ashburton
51
8
Timaru*
237
12
Oamaru
77
9
Queenstown
46
6
Alexandra
42
5
Dunedin*
573
10
Gore
51
7
Balclutha
32
424
Kaikoura
Christchurch*
Invercargill*
Total
17059
Against
justice
Drug
Good
order
%
No.
%
No.
337
8
435
11
208
10
219
10
23
34
8
33
217
21
115
11
8
9
5
4829
29
13 1
0 0
286
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
291
7
1295
31
405
10
4126
100
214
10
557
27
122
6
2097
100
8
27
6
134
31
47
11
431
100
64
6
102
10
322
31
82
8
1027
100
6
5
6
6
7
48
56
4
5
86
100
771
5
1711
10
989
6
5372
10
16936
100
27
35
3
60
6
52
5
554
32 1632
31
52
3
1075
100
1
2
2
3
3
5
4
7
24
41
24
41
58
100
7 1
88 4
152
24
15
2
63
10
29
5
291
45
32
5
640
100
406
20
162
8
215
11
171
8
630
31
119
6
2028
100
28 3
15 2
146
17
51
6
56
7
130
15
318
37
51
6
857
100
68
9
86
11
39
5
165
21
310
39
56
7
785
100
15 2
211 4
170
21
48
6
35
4
93
11
316
39
97
12
816
100
1465
25
401
7
701
12
573
27
433
7
5973
100
127
17
47
6
56
7
63
44
29
4
748
100
9
46 6
2 1
10 1616
329
8
109
31
13
4
29
8
19
5
143
40
9
3
356
100
10
91 2
1292
30
144
3
420
10
408
9
1291
30
305
7
4375
100
9 201517
100
2 2
329 2
8 4628 2 47263 23 11326
6 23840 12 15009
7 63360 31 19032
Notes:
1 The figures in this table are charge-based.
2 The courts marked with an * have a High Court and/or hold District Court jury trials.
•
Drug offences accounted for a low of 2% of all convictions in Manukau and Ashburton,
and a high of 11% of all convictions in Warkworth, Wairoa, Greymouth and Queenstown.
The national average was 6%.
•
Only 4% of the convictions in Alexandra were for offences against justice, while in
Papakura and New Plymouth, 19% of the convictions involved such offences. Across
New Zealand as a whole, 12% of convicted charges involved offences against justice.
•
Offences against good order accounted for only 4% of the convictions in Manukau and
Huntly, while in Queenstown 21% of the convictions involved such offences. This
compared to a national average of 7%.
•
Traffic offences accounted for 22% of convictions in Wellington, while representing 56%
of all charges convicted in Marton, and 31% nationally.
•
In Waihi 42% of all convictions involved miscellaneous offences. The proportions in the
other regions were considerably lower than this, with the lowest proportion recorded at
both Pukekohe and Taumaranui courts where 1% of all convictions involved
miscellaneous offences. Nationally, 9% of convictions involved miscellaneous offences.
2.14 Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders convicted
This section presents information on the gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders who were
convicted of each type of offence in 2006.
52
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.16 presents information on the gender of offenders who were convicted for each type
7
of offence in 2006.
Table 2.17 presents information on the age of offenders who were convicted for each type of
offence in 2006.
The data used in the previous sections of this chapter was charge-based, whereas the data
used in this section is case-based. See Section 3.1 for a full description of how cases are
formed from charges.
Of the cases that resulted in conviction in 2006 and for which the gender of the offender was
known, 82% involved male offenders and 18% involved female offenders (see Table 2.16).
Table 2.16 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
gender of offender, 2006
Male
Offence type
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
Female
Unknown
No.
%
No.
%
No.
9737
1540
14470
4125
10497
8435
36588
5894
91286
88
85
76
82
82
88
80
86
82
1371
266
4470
892
2307
1121
8866
967
20260
12
15
24
18
18
12
20
14
18
23
1
25
11
4
15
127
91
297
Total
No.
11131
1807
18965
5028
12808
9571
45581
6952
111843
Note: Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where gender was not known.
In 2006, 88% of the convictions for a violent offence involved male offenders and 12%
involved female offenders.
Female offenders were responsible for 24% of the property offence cases and 20% of the
traffic offence cases that resulted in conviction in 2006. Cases involving traffic offences
accounted for 44% of all cases for which females were convicted in 2006. This proportion is
slightly higher than the corresponding proportion for males (40%). Almost one-fifth (22%) of
the offences for which females were convicted in 2006 involved property offences, while the
corresponding proportion for males was 16%.
In 2006, in cases for which the age of the offender was known (see Table 2.17):
•
Less than 1% involved offenders aged 14 to 16 years
•
21% involved offenders aged 17 to 19 years
•
24% involved offenders aged 20 to 24 years
•
14% involved offenders aged 25 to 29 years
7
Cases where a conviction was entered against a corporation (n=931) have been excluded from the
Tables 2.16, 2.17, and 2.18.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
53
•
21% involved offenders aged 30 to 39 years
•
19% involved offenders aged 40 years or older.
Table 2.17 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and age
of offender, 2006
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unkn
-own
Total
No.
%
No.
No.
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
No.
Violent
40
Other against
0
persons
Property
19
Drug
2
Against justice
5
Good order
5
Traffic
411
Miscellaneous 10
Total
492
0
1656 15
2287 21
1728 16
3025
27
2380
21
15
11131
0
331 18
416 23
262 15
453
25
344
19
1
1807
15 3760
17 1449
18 2960
13 1836
13 8837
12 1124
14 23444
20
29
23
19
19
17
21
2776
1169
1552
1381
9933
1263
20798
15
23
12
14
22
19
19
Offence type
Note:
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
4773
581
2000
2448
10133
1776
23698
%
%
25 4807 25 2761
986 20
839
12
16 3885 31 2292
26 2652 28 1243
22 10341 23 5879
801
27 1593 24
21 26967 24 15805
69 18965
2
5028
114 12808
6
9571
47 45581
385
6952
639 111843
Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where age was not known. Percentages less than 0.5 are
shown as 0% due to rounding.
Offenders aged 20 to 29 were responsible for 36% of the cases involving violent offences in
2006, while offenders aged 30 to 39 accounted for 27%. People aged 40 years and above
were responsible for 21% of the cases involving violent offences in 2006, while teenage
offenders accounted for 15%.
Offenders aged 17 to 19 were responsible for one-quarter of the property offence convictions
in 2006, while those in their twenties accounted for 40%. For offenders aged 30 to 39, the
proportion was 20%.
In 2006, 84% of convictions involving young persons aged 14 to 16 were for traffic offences,
and, in particular, non-imprisonable traffic cases, which do not usually fall within the
jurisdiction of the Youth Court. While many non-traffic offences involving young persons (i.e.
those aged 14 to 16) are ‘proved’ in the Youth Court, this does not result in a conviction.
Almost half (48%) of the convictions involving offenders aged 40 years and over were for
traffic offences.
Table 2.18 presents information on the ethnicity of offenders who were convicted for each
type of offence in 2006. As discussed in Section 1.5, the way ethnicity data is collected has
implications on its quality. In 2006, ethnicity was known for 87% of offenders. Of the
convicted cases for which the ethnicity of the offender was recorded, 45% involved NZ
Europeans, 43% involved Mäori, 9% involved Pacific peoples, and 3% involved offenders
from other ethnic groups (see Table 2.18).
In 2006, NZ European offenders accounted for 36% of convicted cases involving violent
offences, Mäori offenders accounted for 48%, Pacific peoples accounted for 13%. In 2006,
9% of the convicted cases involving NZ Europeans were violent offences (3,944 out of
43,689). The proportions for Mäori and Pacific peoples were higher, at 12% and 15%
respectively.
54
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 2.18 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
ethnicity of offender, 20061,2
NZ European
Mäori
Pacific
peoples
Offence type
Violent
Other against
persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
3944
36
5202
48
1394
812
46
755
43
7406
2657
4022
4065
18647
2136
43689
42
54
37
43
50
43
45
8536
1917
5596
4196
13834
1961
41997
48
39
52
45
37
40
43
Other
Unknown
Total
No.
No.
No.
%
13
283
3
308
11131
151
9
42
2
47
1807
1295
200
1016
922
3407
715
9100
7
4
9
10
9
14
9
365
134
174
199
1705
127
3029
2
3
2
2
5
3
3
1363
120
2000
189
7988
2013
14028
18965
5028
12808
9571
45581
6952
111843
Notes:
1 Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data quality.
2 Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where ethnicity was not known.
NZ European offenders accounted for 42% of the property cases in 2006, while Mäori
offenders accounted for 48% of such cases, and Pacific peoples for 7%.
In 2006, 54% per cent of the convictions for drug offences involved NZ Europeans, while
39% involved Mäori offenders and 4% involved Pacific peoples. Drug offences comprised
only 2% of all convicted cases involving Pacific peoples in 2006. This is a lower percentage
than both NZ Europeans (6%) and Mäori (5%).
Forty-three per cent of all cases resulting in conviction for NZ Europeans were for traffic
offence cases, while for Mäori and Pacific peoples, the proportions were 33% and 37%
respectively.
Table A1 in Appendix presents information on the ethnicity of offenders who were convicted
8
of each type of offence in 2005.
2.15 Victims of sex offences in 2006
This section presents information on the victims of sex offences that resulted in the
conviction of an offender in 2006, including the victim’s gender and age at the time of the
offence. Each charge that resulted in a conviction is counted separately in Table 2.19.
Because some offenders may have been convicted of several charges involving the same
victim, the figures in the table are likely to be greater than the actual number of individual
victims in each age category. There were 235 charges involving non-violent sexual offences
resulting in a conviction shown in Table 2.8 that have been excluded from Table 2.19. These
8
Problems with the electronic transfer of ethnicity data for 2005 were identified in 2006 when a larger
proportion of defendants were found to have ‘unknown’ ethnicity in their records than in previous years.
While this was under investigation, the 2004 ethnicity data was presented in the 2005 report titled
‘Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1996–2005’. 751 cases where a conviction
was entered against a corporation were excluded from this table.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
55
were mostly offences that involved committing an indecent act in a public place or obscene
exposure in a public place, which were not categorised according to the age of victims.
Some charges were also excluded because they could not be classified into any of the
categories in this table.
In 2006, there were 1,638 convictions for charges involving violent sex offences. The age of
the victim was recorded in 98% of these cases. Where the age of the victim was available,
41% (663) involved victims who were under the age of 12 at the time of the offence, 33%
(534) involved victims aged between 12 and 16 years, and 25% (409) involved victims over
the age of 16.
Of the offences involving victims aged 16 or under, where the gender of the victim was
recorded, 87% involved female victims and 13% involved male victims.
Table 2.19 Number of convictions for various sex offences, by age and gender of the
victim, 20061
Age and gender of victim2
< 12 Years
Offence
Rape
Unlawful sexual
connection
Attempted sexual
violation
Indecent assault
Subtotal - Violent
Incest
Do indecent act
Unlawful sexual
intercourse
Attempted unlawful
sexual intercourse
Anal intercourse
Subtotal - Other
against persons
Total
12-16 Years
M
F
Unk
-
75
29
> 16 Years
Unknown
M
F
Unk
M
F
Unk
M
F
Unk
-
-
66
-
-
81
-
-
0
-
166
0
26
86
90
11
81
1
0
0
14
0
6
0
1
5
0
1
22
1
0
1
5
40
69
0
26
347
594
1
93
0
0
0
0
43
70
0
65
217
374
3
55
0
90
3
0
19
31
0
0
192
376
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
10
8
27
0
0
-
0
-
-
14
-
-
0
-
-
5
-
-
0
-
-
2
-
-
0
-
-
4
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
26
94
0
65
74
3
0
0
2
1
19
1
95
688
0
135
448
93
31
376
4
1
24
28
Notes:
1 Only sex offences included in the categories violent and other offences against the person were included in this table.
2 The gender of the victim is indicated in this table by the abbreviations M = Male, F = Female, and Unk = Unknown. A
dash (-) indicates that the offence type was not applicable to the gender.
One-third of the violent sex charges resulting in a conviction in 2006 were committed at least
five years before the date the offender was convicted, and 20% were committed at least 10
years prior to conviction. Eighty-six per cent of the convictions for offences that occurred at
least 10 years ago involved victims who were under 17 years of age at the time.
In addition to the convictions for charges involving violent sex offences discussed above,
there were 285 convictions for other sex offences against the person in 2006 included in
Table 2.19. These are offences for which it is not known whether the offence involved
violence or the threat of such an act. For this reason, they have been classified as other
56
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
offences against the person. Most of these offences are not crimes if they take place
between fully consenting adults. However, they are offences in situations when the victim is:
•
under the age of 16 years
•
under the age of 20 and under the care or protection of another person
•
is a person with a significant impairment
In some cases, there may have been force or coercion involved, but there was insufficient
evidence to prove this. In other cases the victim will either have been willing or been
persuaded or tricked by the offender to become involved in the sexual act. The victim’s age
category was known for 93% of these charges. Where age was known, 45% involved victims
under the age of 12 years, and 54% involved victims aged between 12 and 16 years. Where
gender was known, 67% of charges relating to other sex offences against the person
involved female victims.
2.16 Summary of key findings
The key findings for this chapter are as follows:
•
The number of charges prosecuted has been increasing since 2002.
•
Between 2005 and 2006, the number of charges prosecuted increased by 7% from
287,535 to 308,965.
•
The number of convictions has been rising since 2002, and increased by 7% between
2005 and 2006, from 187,511 to 201,517.
•
While a conviction continued to be the most common outcome of a prosecution
throughout the decade, the proportion of all prosecutions resulting in a conviction
decreased slightly from 69% in 1997 to 65% in 2006.
•
During the decade, the number of convictions generally increased for violent offences,
other offences against the person, offences against justice, offences against good order,
traffic offences, and miscellaneous offences.
•
The number of convictions for property and drug offences generally declined between
1997 and 2006.
•
Traffic offences comprised the largest group of offences resulting in a conviction during
the period, followed by property offences.
•
Throughout the decade, violent offences accounted for an average of 9% of all
convictions each year.
•
The average seriousness score of all convictions dropped from 46 in 1997 to 40 in 2006.
•
Auckland courts finalised the highest total number of convicted charges nationally,
processing 21,356 out of a total of 201,517 convictions in 2006.
•
Where gender was known, 82% of cases resulting in a conviction involved males and
18% involved females in 2006.
•
Where age was known, 45% of convicted cases involved offenders aged between 17 and
24 in 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
57
58
•
Where ethnicity was known, 45% of cases resulting in a conviction involved NZ
Europeans, 43% involved Mäori, 9% involved Pacific peoples, and 3% involved persons
belonging to other ethnic groups in 2006.
•
In 2006, 1,638 charges involving violent sex offences resulted in a conviction. Of these,
41% involved victims who were under 12 years of age at the time of the offence.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3
Sentencing for all offences
3.1
Introduction
This chapter examines patterns in sentencing for all cases resulting in a conviction over the
9
period 1997–2006. The following types of sentence are examined:
•
custodial sentences (life imprisonment, preventive detention, imprisonment, and
corrective training)
•
community-based sentences (community work, periodic detention, community service,
community programme, and supervision)
•
monetary penalties (fines and reparation)
•
deferred sentences (i.e. to come up for sentence if called upon and suspended prison
sentences)
•
other sentences (e.g. a disqualification from driving or an order under section 34 of the
Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 for treatment or care of the
offender in a psychiatric hospital or secure facility)
•
conviction and discharge under section 20 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 or section 108
of the Sentencing Act 2002.
The first part of this chapter will identify the major legislative changes that have affected the
range and nature of sentencing options available during the last decade, before presenting
information on the number and proportion of cases receiving each type of sentence. It will
also explore changes in the average seriousness of convicted cases resulting in different
sentence types.
The second part of this chapter will provide more detailed information about the sentencing
structure for each of the main offence categories, including: violent offences, other offences
against the person, property, drugs, offences against the administration of justice, offences
against good order, traffic, and miscellaneous offences. For each of these offence categories
the number and proportion of convicted cases resulting in different sentence types will be
discussed, as well as the average length of custodial sentence imposed. These figures will
also be provided for different offences within each category. A discussion of the average
seriousness of cases resulting in each type of sentence will also be included for selected
offence categories.
The final part of this chapter will present information on the gender, age, and ethnicity of
offenders involved in convicted cases by each sentence type in 2006.
The information presented in this chapter is case-based. As outlined in Chapter 1, the
system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This may have caused
9
The sentences available to the courts changed over the decade. Section 3.2 describes these changes.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
59
changes in the figures and trends that were observed before 2003 and after 2004. In
particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in
offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be applied when making inferences based on
any change between 2003 and 2004. For this reason, case trends for the periods 1997 to
2003 and 2004 to 2006 will be analysed separately in this report.
For both LES and CMS data, where a case involved more than one charge, the charge taken
to represent the case is the one that resulted in the most serious penalty. If two or more
charges result in the same type and length or amount of penalty, then the charge taken to
represent the case is the one where the type of offence committed has the highest
seriousness score using the seriousness of offence scale described in Section 2.4.
This chapter only presents information on the most serious sentence imposed in a case. For
example, if in a single case an offender was sentenced to community work and reparation for
one charge and supervision for another charge, the offender would appear in the statistics in
this chapter as having been sentenced to community work for that particular case, as this
10
sentence has the highest ranking in terms of seriousness. Selecting one sentence to
represent a case in this manner means that the number of sentences for supervision,
reparation, and driving disqualifications presented in this report will be an undercount, as
these sentences are the ones most frequently combined with more serious sentences.
Chapters 5 and 6 include information on the use of supervision, fines, and reparation with
other sentences.
There are three situations in which the imposition of a sentence is not usually recorded in the
data used for this report. The first is when offenders who default in the payment of their fine
or reparation sentence have a sentence of community work or, in limited circumstances,
11
imprisonment substituted by a judge. The second is when offenders sentenced to a
community-based sentence have their sentence reviewed, sometimes resulting in some other
sentence being imposed. The third, which only arose prior to the introduction of the
Sentencing Act in 2002, is when offenders subject to a suspended sentence of imprisonment
12
had the sentence activated because of a subsequent conviction. Because the sentences
imposed in these situations are not usually recorded in the data used for this report, the
actual number of offenders awarded a custodial or community-based sentence in each year
is likely to be greater than the figures shown in this report.
10
11
12
60
Sentence ranking was determined from factors such as the level of restriction and requirements placed
on the offender. See Section 2.4 for further information of the calculation of seriousness scores.
Prior to 30 June 2002, these offenders could be sentenced to imprisonment, corrective training, periodic
detention, or community service.
While the activation of prison sentences is not usually recorded in the data used for this report, the
person is often imprisoned for the subsequent offence at the same time, which is recorded in the data.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3.2
Sentencing legislation
During the last decade two pieces of legislation have significantly impacted on sentencing:
the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Parole Act 2002. Collectively these Acts largely replaced
the Criminal Justice Act 1985 and reformed New Zealand’s criminal justice law in four key
areas:
•
general sentencing purposes and principles
•
the range of sentences and orders available to the courts
•
sentencing for murder and high risk offenders
•
parole and final release of offenders from prison.
The Sentencing Act 2002 made a number of changes to the sentences that were available
under the Criminal Justice Act 1985. The sentences that were available under the Criminal
Justice Act 1985 were:
•
life imprisonment—an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment that is almost solely
imposed on offenders convicted of murder (i.e. the offender is subject to the sentence for
their entire life, although they can be released on parole)
•
preventive detention—an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment that, before 2002, was
generally only imposed on serious repeat sex offenders
•
determinate imprisonment—a sentence of imprisonment for a fixed term
•
corrective training—a three-month custodial sentence for offenders aged between 16 and
19 years involving hard physical work and strict discipline, followed by six months of
supervision
•
suspended sentence of imprisonment—a determinate sentence of imprisonment of up to
two years that was suspended unless the offender was reconvicted within a set period of
time
•
periodic detention—a non-custodial sentence that involves the offender reporting to a
work centre and undertaking community work projects
•
community service—a non-custodial sentence that involves the offender undertaking
work for an approved community agency
•
community programme—a sentence (which may be residential) that involves placing the
offender in the care of an approved organisation, group or individual
•
supervision—a sentence under which the offender is required to comply with various
reporting, residential, association and other conditions
•
reparation—a sentence where financial payment is ordered to be made by the offender to
the victim
•
fine—a sentence where financial payment is ordered to be made by the offender to the
State; prior to 30 June 2002, the court could, in certain circumstances, order the full or
part payment of a fine to the victim of offending
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
61
•
driving disqualification—a sentence where the offender must surrender his or her driver’s
licence for a fixed term, or indefinitely
•
to come up for sentence if called on—an order whereby, if the offender is convicted of a
subsequent offence within a fixed term, he or she may be sentenced for the original
offence.
The major changes that the Sentencing Act 2002 made to these sentences were as follows.
13
•
A new sentence structure was created for people convicted of murder.
•
Preventive detention became available for a wider range of offences and offenders.
(Further details on the legislative changes made regarding preventive detention and
sentencing for murder are presented in Section 4.1.)
•
Corrective training was abolished.
•
Suspended sentences of imprisonment were abolished.
•
A new sentence called community work replaced periodic detention and community
service. Community work is aimed at compensating the community. The offender is
placed at a community work centre, with another agency, or a combination of both of
these.
•
Community programme was abolished.
•
Supervision was modified to include the care aspect of community programme.
•
The presumption in favour of reparation was strengthened, and the provision for the
payment of fines to victims was removed.
•
A presumption in favour of fines was introduced (further details on the legislative changes
made regarding fines and reparation are presented in Chapter 6).
While the Sentencing Act 2002 leaves judges with discretion when sentencing, the Act:
•
sets out the general purposes and principles of sentencing
•
lists aggravating and mitigating factors the court must take into account to the extent they
are applicable to the case
•
specifies the purposes for which each kind of sentence can be imposed
•
requires judges to provide reasons, in open court, for the sentence or order given at a
level of detail appropriate to the offence.
This report presents information on all of the sentences available under both the Criminal
Justice Act 1985 and the Sentencing Act 2002. To make analysis easier, information is
13
62
In the most serious murder cases, where there is at least one aggravating factor, a life sentence must
be imposed and the court must impose a minimum period of at least 17 years before the offender will be
eligible for parole, unless it is satisfied that it would be manifestly unjust to do so. However, the court
can impose a determinate sentence when unusual mitigating factors would make a life sentence clearly
unjust (Ministry of Justice 2002).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
presented on the total number of ‘work-related’ community sentences imposed in each year
in the decade. This is the total of periodic detention, community service, and community
work sentences.
Since 1 October 1999, some offenders have been allowed to serve part of their prison
14
sentences by way of home detention. There are two forms of home detention. Front-end
home detention is available to offenders sentenced to two years’ imprisonment or less who
are granted leave to apply for home detention by the court. The New Zealand Parole Board
determines whether offenders are allowed to serve their sentences on home detention. The
15
courts cannot directly sentence offenders to home detention.
Back-end home detention is available to offenders subject to long-term determinate
sentences (more than two years). The New Zealand Parole Board may allow an offender to
serve his or her sentence on home detention from any date that is three months before the
offender’s parole eligibility date. Back-end home detention is not available to those
sentenced to life imprisonment or preventive detention. As home detention is granted by the
Parole Board and not by the courts, no information on home detention is provided in this
report.
16
The monetary sentences considered in this report are fines and reparation. Fines can be
imposed for nearly every offence. Under the Sentencing Act 2002, reparation can be
imposed if an offender has, through or by means of an offence, caused a person to suffer:
•
loss of or damage to property
•
emotional harm
•
loss or damage consequential on any emotional or physical harm or loss of, or damage
to, property.
As noted above, suspended sentences of imprisonment were abolished from 30 June 2002
by the Sentencing Act 2002. From a legal point of view, suspended prison sentences would
have fallen in the sentencing hierarchy between prison and periodic detention. However,
research undertaken by the Ministry of Justice indicates that the majority of suspended
sentences were imposed on offenders who would not have otherwise received a prison
sentence (see Spier (1998) for further details). Suspended sentences have consequently
been placed further down in the sentencing hierarchy in the deferred category together with
orders to come up for sentence if called upon. This avoids misrepresenting the number of
14
15
16
The regime for release on home detention from a sentence of imprisonment outlined above was
repealed on 1 October 2007. While not impacting on the interpretation of the data presented in this
report, it is important to note that from 1 October 2007 a new custodial sentence of home detention and
a new ‘residential restrictions’ special condition of parole came into force.
In some instances, the start date of a prison sentence could be deferred by the court for up to two
months. This allowed the offender to apply to the Parole Board for home detention, and, if the
application was granted, meant the person started home detention without serving any time in prison.
Only court-imposed fines are included in this report. Fines resulting from infringement notices (for
example, speeding, parking offences, etc.) filed with the District Court for enforcement are not included.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
63
prison sentences that would have been imposed if the power to suspend prison sentences
did not exist. For this reason, suspended sentences rarely show up as the most serious
sentence imposed in the case-based data used in this report (for more detailed information
on the use of such sentences in New Zealand see Spier (1998) chapters 8 and 9).
Although there were significant changes to the sentencing regime in New Zealand from 30
June 2002 when the Sentencing Act 2002 came into force, the full effects of these changes
were not immediately apparent in the sentencing data due to the Act’s transitional provisions
and its gradual implementation in practice.
3.3
Sentencing for all cases
This section presents information on sentencing for all convicted cases over the period 1997
to 2006. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 respectively show the number and percentage of cases resulting
in each type of sentence for each calendar year from 1997 to 2006. Figure 3.1 graphs the
information displayed in Table 3.2.
Table 3.1
Total number of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1997
to 20061,2
LES
3
Sentence type
1997
1998
Custodial
Community work4
Periodic detention5
Community service5
Subtotal - work-related6
Community programme5
Supervision
Monetary7
Deferment8
Other9
Conviction & discharge10
Total
8102
8255
19510 21340
7812
8525
27322 29865
430
379
5037
5004
47515 47165
3233
3560
808
983
4068
4994
96515 100205
CMS
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
8177
20481
8226
28707
287
4550
47326
3502
1116
4982
98647
7886
18395
7124
25519
203
4024
47215
3590
1125
5945
95507
7805
18461
6764
25225
207
3367
48028
3606
1135
6233
95606
7930
12693
8791
3073
24557
54
2312
48507
3612
1226
6141
94339
8497 10353 10553 10469
25073 24839 24998 27196
25073 24839 24998 27196
1894
2014
2347
2243
50733 52918 50650 53207
4134
4831
4916
5345
1295
1878
1897
2061
6960 12184 12573 12253
98586 109017 107934 112774
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 Only the most serious sentence imposed is shown for cases where more than one sentence was imposed.
3 A dash (-) indicates that the sentence was not legislated for in that particular time period.
4 Community work was introduced from 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
5 Sentence abolished from 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
6 Subtotal of community work, periodic detention, and community service.
7 On this and subsequent tables, monetary penalties are fines and reparation.
8 To come up for sentence if called on or a suspended prison sentence. Suspended prison sentences were abolished
from 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
9 Mainly cases that resulted in disqualification from driving, or an order under section 34 of the Criminal Procedure
(Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 for treatment or care of the offender in a psychiatric hospital or secure facility.
Deportation orders are also included in this category.
10 Conviction and discharge under section 20 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985, or section 108 of the Sentencing Act
2002.
Table 3.1 shows that between 1997 and 2003, convicted cases fluctuated considerably
ranging from around 94,000 to 100,000. Between 2004 and 2006, the number of convicted
cases increased by 3%, from 109,017 to 112,774. Table 3.2 shows that, from 1997 to 2003,
64
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
between 8% and 9% of convicted cases each year resulted in a custodial sentence. From
2004 to 2006, the proportion was between 9% and 10%. Chapter 4 provides a more detailed
analysis of trends in custodial sentences and remands.
Table 3.2 shows that the percentages of all convictions each year that resulted in the
imposition of a work-related community sentence (community work, periodic detention, or
community service) trended downwards from 1998 to 2003. The proportion ranged between
25% and 30% from 1997 to 2003, and was between 23% and 24% during the last three years
of the period.
Table 3.2
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1997
to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
8.4
8.2
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.4
8.6
9.5
9.8
9.3
13.5
25.4
22.8
23.2
24.1
20.2
21.3
20.8
19.3
19.3
9.3
8.1
8.5
8.3
7.5
7.1
3.3
28.3
29.8
29.1
26.7
26.4
26.0
25.4
22.8
23.2
24.1
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
5.2
5.0
4.6
4.2
3.5
2.5
1.9
1.8
2.2
2.0
49.2
47.1
48.0
49.4
50.2
51.4
51.5
48.5
46.9
47.2
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.8
1.8
4.2
5.0
5.1
6.2
6.5
6.5
7.1
11.2
11.6
10.9
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
There was a downward trend in the use of supervision as the principal sentence of a case
after 1999; a trend which began prior to the commencement of the Sentencing Act in 2002.
More recent figures, however, have demonstrated an upward movement, with an 11%
increase evident in supervision sentences between 2004 and 2006, from 2,014 to 2,243.
Chapter 5 provides a more detailed analysis of community-based sentences.
The Sentencing Act 2002 contains a presumption in favour of fines that was not present in
17
the Criminal Justice Act 1985. The Sentencing Act strengthens the presumption in favour
of reparation and more clearly states the circumstances when such a sentence will be
appropriate. If a court considers that it would otherwise be appropriate to impose a sentence
17
Research investigating District Court Judges’ views on court-imposed fines conducted in 2001 found
that some judges felt that the Sentencing Act 2002 would make little difference to current practice
because they were already imposing a fine whenever possible. Other judges, however, were reluctant
to see fines used more widely—mainly due to many offenders’ inability to pay. The study, which
included a survey of all district judges (n=64), found that half of the participating judges said they would
impose an alternative sentence in more than 50% of cases because the offender could not afford to pay
the fine they would usually impose (Searle 2003).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
65
of reparation and a fine, but it appears to the court that the offender only has the means to
pay one, the court must sentence the offender to make reparation.
During the decade, approximately half of all convicted cases each year resulted in a
monetary penalty (in particular, fines) as the most serious sentence. This proportion
remained relatively constant between 1997 and 2006. Chapter 6 will provide more detailed
analysis on monetary penalties.
The proportion of convicted cases resulting in a deferred sentence (deferment) ranged from
3% to 4% between 1997 and 2003. In 2006, around 5% of convicted cases were deferred.
As shown in Table 3.2, between 1997 and 2003, around 1% of convicted cases resulted in
‘other’ sentences. As noted in Section 3.1, these sentences include an order under section
34 of the Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 for treatment or care of
an offender in a psychiatric hospital or secure facility. From 2004 to 2006, the proportion of
such sentences comprised around 2% of all convicted cases.
Figure 3.1
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in each type of sentence, 1997
to 2006
LES
100%
CMS
90%
80%
70%
60%
Custodial
Community
Monetary
Other
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
After 1997 there was an increase in the number of cases where a person is convicted and
discharged (i.e. convicted with no sentence being imposed). Between 1997 and 2003, the
proportion ranged between 4% and 7%. During the 2004 to 2006 period, the proportion of
cases resulting in conviction and discharge ranged between 11% and 12%.
Table 3.3 presents the average seriousness of cases that resulted in each sentence, and the
average seriousness of all convicted cases. The seriousness scale used is described in
Section 2.4. Between 1997 and 2003, the overall average seriousness of convicted cases
ranged between 39 and 44. Between 2004 and 2006, the overall average scores stabilised
between 37 and 38.
66
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.3
Average seriousness of cases resulting in each type of sentence, and
average seriousness of all cases resulting in conviction, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Overall average
281
49
27
43
106
71
6
24
22
8
44
272
47
24
40
98
67
6
21
13
7
42
267
48
26
41
103
64
6
21
16
7
42
274
50
25
43
91
71
6
20
17
6
42
265
45
27
40
97
74
6
19
20
7
40
283
39
47
29
41
96
73
6
17
14
6
41
281
39
39
59
5
14
15
6
39
245
40
40
57
5
15
12
5
37
247
40
40
51
5
12
17
5
38
249
40
40
48
4
14
19
6
37
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using the
new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
The average seriousness of offences resulting in a custodial sentence is considerably greater
than for any other type of sentence (see Table 3.3). Between 1997 and 2003, the average
seriousness of cases that resulted in a custodial sentence ranged between 265 and 283.
From 2004 to 2006, the seriousness of cases resulting in a custodial sentence ranged
between 245 and 249.
On average, monetary penalties are imposed for much less serious cases than custodial or
community-based sentences. The average seriousness of the offences resulting in a
monetary penalty as the most serious penalty has remained consistent over the decade,
ranging between 4 and 6.
The average seriousness of cases resulting in a deferred sentence has demonstrated a
downward trend. Between 1997 and 2003 the figures ranged from 14 to 24, before dropping
to an average of 14 between 2004 and 2006. However, care should be exercised when
interpreting changes in the average seriousness of cases resulting in deferred sentences.
While seriousness is a relevant consideration, the outcome of such cases will generally be
determined on the basis of factors relating to the offender, such as whether the offence was
an out-of-character one-off incident. In such instances, the offender may be given a second
chance.
For information on the custodial sentences imposed by type of offence, see Tables 4.1 and
4.2. Table 4.3 shows trends in the length of the custodial sentences imposed over the
decade.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
67
3.4
Sentencing for violent offences
This section presents information on the sentencing of cases involving all violent offences as
a group, as well as information on the use of custodial sentences for some individual violent
offences.
Tables 3.4 and 3.5 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving violent
offences resulting in each sentence from 1997 to 2006. Figure 3.2 graphs the information
displayed in Table 3.5.
Table 3.4
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
Note:
1998
CMS
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2230 2225 2180
2593 2763 2630
617
609
655
3210 3372 3285
134
116
85
1829 1770 1663
2159 2074 1887
855
890
804
31
31
45
233
261
274
10681 10739 10223
2116
2583
563
3146
56
1388
2022
801
29
280
9838
2115
2436
601
3037
71
1184
2085
855
53
307
9707
2082
1604
1261
267
3132
20
878
2064
845
39
343
9403
2268 2512 2632 2705
3350 3275 3653 3717
3350 3275 3653 3717
689
699
975
872
2054 2226 2211 1950
1036 1146 1244 1471
40
37
42
53
318
379
366
363
9755 10274 11123 11131
2004
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.5
Percentage of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
1998
1999
2000
CMS
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
20.9 20.7 21.3 21.5 21.8 22.1 23.2 24.5 23.7 24.3
17.1 34.3 31.9 32.8 33.4
24.3 25.7 25.7 26.3 25.1 13.4
5.8
5.7
6.4
5.7
6.2
2.8
30.1 31.4 32.1 32.0 31.3 33.3 34.3 31.9 32.8 33.4
1.3
1.1
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.2
17.1 16.5 16.3 14.1 12.2
9.3
7.1
6.8
8.8
7.8
20.2 19.3 18.5 20.6 21.5 22.0 21.1 21.7 19.9 17.5
8.0
8.3
7.9
8.1
8.8
9.0 10.6 11.2 11.2 13.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
2.2
2.4
2.7
2.8
3.2
3.6
3.3
3.7
3.3
3.3
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
68
2005
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Between 1997 and 2003, around 21% to 23% of convicted cases involving violent offences
resulted in custodial sentences. During the 2004 and 2006 period, the figures ranged from
around 24% to 25% (see Table 3.5).
Table 3.5 shows that the proportion of convicted cases involving violent offences that
resulted in work-related community sentences increased slightly over the decade. Between
1997 and 2003, the proportion ranged from 30% to 34%, with the figures remaining between
32% and 33% from 2004 to 2006.
The use of supervision as the most serious sentence for cases involving violent offences
declined by 62% between 1997 and 2003 (from 1,829 to 689). Between 2004 and 2006, the
number of supervision sentences imposed for cases involving violent offences rose by 25%,
from 699 in 2004 to 872 in 2006 (see Table 3.4).
Figure 3.2
Percentage of convicted cases involving violent offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
100%
CMS
90%
80%
70%
60%
Custodial
Community
Monetary
Other
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Table 3.6 shows the number of convicted cases involving violent offences at each level of
offence seriousness and the average seriousness of violent offences for each year from 1997
to 2006. The seriousness score groupings in the table have little inherent meaning, but are a
useful way of categorising offences—see Section 2.4 for a description of the way these
seriousness scores are calculated.
The average seriousness of violent offences shows a downward trend over the decade.
Between 1997 and 2003, the average seriousness scores fluctuated between 189 and 212.
From 2004 to 2006, the average seriousness score for violent offences was 189. The most
significant factor in the drop in overall average seriousness score was the reduction in the
number of violent cases with seriousness scores over 500.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
69
Table 3.6
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences with each level of
offence seriousness and average seriousness of violent offences, 1997 to
20061,2
LES
CMS
Seriousness score
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
0-1
>1-10
>10-50
>50-100
>100-500
>500
Overall average
1
4609
2920
873
976
1302
212
0
4718
2773
960
1025
1263
204
1
4544
2620
922
952
1184
201
0
4377
2496
930
957
1078
195
1
4337
2541
884
918
1026
189
0
4279
2238
919
972
995
198
1
4277
2377
1005
996
1099
201
1
4516
2586
968
1117
1086
191
0
4751
2969
1041
1224
1138
185
0
4719
2941
997
1326
1148
190
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using
the new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
Figure 3.3 shows that between 1998 and 2001, although the average seriousness of violent
offences declined, the courts imposed sentences of imprisonment in an increasing proportion
of violent cases. However, this does not necessarily mean that sentencing has become more
punitive. The change could be due to other factors, such as changes in the criminal histories
(including previous compliance with non-custodial sentences) of defendants coming before
the courts. From 2004 to 2006, the proportion of convicted cases resulting in imprisonment
followed the same trend as the average seriousness of violent offences.
Figure 3.3
Percentage of violent offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence,
and average seriousness of violent offences resulting in conviction, 1997
to 2006
LES
CMS
30%
240
Average seriousness
220
25%
200
180
% of
cases
resulting
in a
custodial
sentence
20%
160
% of custodial sentences
140
15%
120
Average
seriousness
100
10%
80
60
5%
40
20
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
0
2006
Year
70
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.7 shows the actual number of convicted cases by violent offence type. Tables 3.8
and 3.9 show the trends in custodial sentences imposed for different types of violent
offences. As Table 3.7 demonstrates, the annual conviction figures for manslaughter,
attempted murder, and attempted sexual violation cases are relatively small; caution should
therefore be exercised when interpreting proportions calculated for these offences.
Table 3.7
Number of convicted cases involving violent offences by offence type,
1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
1997
Murder
Manslaughter
Attempted murder
Kidnapping/abduction
Rape
Unlawful sexual connection
Attempted sexual violation
Indecent assault
Aggravated burglary
Aggravated robbery
Robbery
Grievous assault
Serious assault
Male assaults female
Assault on a child
Minor assault
Threaten to kill/do GBH
Cruelty to a child
Other violence
Total
37
24
23
26
43
27
15
4
6
59
66
35
128
130
116
116
119
123
32
21
27
331
304
298
52
44
41
389
401
395
198
189
177
936 1033
979
2118 2242 2216
2646 2502 2331
207
197
214
2934 2951 2753
370
388
382
6
9
21
81
72
59
10681 10739 10223
Note:
1998
1999
2000
29
18
7
40
94
116
25
273
39
336
138
998
2321
2236
185
2534
379
11
59
9838
CMS
2001
2002
19
30
10
55
106
129
19
245
46
267
120
964
2369
2257
207
2417
363
18
66
9707
28
29
13
50
102
112
12
299
36
250
126
1004
2339
1969
195
2360
391
12
76
9403
2003
2004
2005
2006
21
23
20
26
32
50
16
25
3
10
4
4
68
50
45
69
121
96
114
116
127
112
129
110
18
18
18
20
266
258
284
264
42
65
68
41
275
256
326
317
144
148
185
197
1052 1098 1197 1216
2409 2661 2899 2989
2116 2281 2663 2651
172
220
200
171
2346 2426 2469 2402
446
437
401
409
15
13
13
13
82
52
72
91
9755 10274 11123 11131
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Between 1997 and 2003, the number of cases involving violent offences declined by 9%,
from 10,681 in 1997 to 9,755 in 2003. The figures increased by 8% between 2004 and 2006
(an increase of 857 cases). In 2006, 85% of the convictions for violent cases involved
physical assaults, with serious assaults, male assaults female, and minor assaults
accounting for 27%, 24%, and 22% of all convicted violent offence cases respectively.
Table 3.8 shows that the most serious violent offences (those involving homicide or sexual
violation) almost always result in a custodial sentence, as do the majority of other serious
offences such as aggravated robbery, aggravated burglary, and kidnapping or abduction.
For the most serious category of non-sexual assaults—grievous assault— between 41% and
51% of convictions resulted in a custodial sentence between 1997 and 2003. Between 2004
and 2006, the proportion of such cases resulting in imprisonment increased from 49% to
54%.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
71
Table 3.8
Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by
violent offence type, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Murder
Manslaughter
Attempted murder
Kidnapping/abduction
Rape
Unlawful sexual connection
Attempted sexual violation
Indecent assault
Aggravated burglary
Aggravated robbery
Robbery
Grievous assault
Serious assault
Male assaults female
Assault on a child
Minor assault
Threaten to kill/do GBH
Cruelty to a child
Other violence
Overall
100
92
93
76
95
80
88
42
54
78
67
43
13
13
12
4
20
33*
47
21
100
86
85
98
91
95
38
70
77
57
41
12
14
13
3
19
56*
53
21
100
89
67*
60
97
89
85
42
78
79
61
45
14
13
7
3
24
24
41
21
100
89
100*
73
97
90
96
46
85
85
64
43
14
14
16
3
25
73
37
22
100
97
90
76
97
88
89
49
76
83
61
45
14
15
14
3
23
56
53
22
100
93
100
72
100
96
75
47
78
83
67
51
13
12
18
3
24
58
57
22
100
100
78
98
97
94
56
64
95
76
51
13
12
9
3
22
53
56
23
100
98
100
80
99
96
89
59
86
93
74
53
15
16
19
4
25
38
48
24
100
100
89
100
95
100
52
94
91
66
49
14
15
11
4
25
46
46
24
96
100
83
98
95
95
56
83
91
61
54
15
15
12
4
25
31
66
24
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
Table 3.9 shows the average length (in months) of custodial sentences imposed for each
type of violent offence, as well as the average length of custodial sentences for all violent
offences. Between 1997 and 2003, the average length of imprisonment imposed for violent
offences increased by 4% from 28 months to 29 months. Between 2004 and 2006, the
average length of custodial sentence imposed for violent offences was 26 months.
The average custodial sentence length for murder is not shown in Table 3.9 because prior to
the Sentencing Act 2002 the mandatory sentence for murder was life imprisonment.
However, sentences for murder are included in the overall average figure. Life imprisonment
is now the presumptive, but not mandatory, sentence for murder. Section 102(1) of the
Sentencing Act 2002 states: ‘An offender who is convicted of murder must be sentenced to
imprisonment for life unless, given the circumstances of the offence and the offender, a
sentence of imprisonment for life would be manifestly unjust’. Since 30 June 2002, only three
determinate sentences of imprisonment have been imposed on an offender convicted of
murder; two of these cases had a life sentence substituted on appeal.
In July 1999, the Crimes Act 1961 was amended, by increasing the maximum penalties for a
number of serious violent and sexual offences by three or five years if the offence involved
‘home invasion’. All of the categories in Table 3.9, except serious assault, male assaults
female, assault on a child, minor assault, and cruelty to a child were affected by this
72
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
legislative change. Because the maximum penalty for manslaughter was already life
imprisonment (although that sentence was rarely imposed), the legislative change meant that
the courts were justified in imposing a longer determinant sentence than would otherwise
have been appropriate in cases involving home invasion. Life imprisonment was mandatory
for murder, but if a murder involved a home invasion the mandatory minimum non-parole
period became at least 13 years, rather than the standard 10 years.
Table 3.9
Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
violent offence, 1997 to 20061,2,3,4
LES
Offence type
Manslaughter
Attempted murder
Kidnapping/abduction
Rape
Unlawful sexual connection
Attempted sexual violation
Indecent assault
Aggravated burglary
Aggravated robbery
Robbery
Grievous assault
Serious assault
Male assaults female
Assault on a child
Minor assault
Threaten to kill/do GBH
Cruelty to a child
Other violence
Overall average
1997
63.1
83.6
36.1
86.9
52.6
61.0
19.9
30.5
39.8
20.4
21.8
7.9
6.6
5.5
2.4
9.4
22.0
27.9
1998
59.8
39.5
96.3
51.5
47.1
20.4
33.5
40.1
22.9
22.9
7.2
6.6
6.9
2.2
7.0
12.2*
19.7
27.7
1999
2000
71.4
63.8
102.0*
29.3
36.2
97.6
95.9
62.6
62.1
49.2
43.4
21.6
20.7
26.5
42.1
44.6
41.4
22.2
21.4
22.0
25.6
7.2
7.5
6.7
7.3
8.5
7.6
2.3
2.0
8.4
8.5
15.0* 17.0*
17.6
20.6
28.2
28.3
CMS
2001
2002
70.1
94.7*
31.7
92.7
61.7
55.0
22.8
52.0
41.7
24.1
23.6
7.3
6.7
6.0
2.3
7.8
11.6
17.4
27.2
2003
2004
70.6
68.3
66.8
73.8
103.5
43.3
32.9
30.8
99.9 106.9
99.0
54.5
50.7
63.4
57.3* 62.5
44.1
19.7
18.9
23.3
40.1
28.5
33.0
44.3
43.3
37.0
19.1
23.1
20.2
25.4
23.7
23.9
7.9
8.1
7.8
7.3
7.1
6.6
8.4
9.5
8.3
2.1
3.1
1.6
9.2
10.0
8.5
19.3* 15.8* 20.6*
18.5
15.7
22.0
29.3
29.1
26.2
2005
2006
71.4
62.2
35.2
36.4
98.8 104.9
54.8
55.0
52.8
50.6
18.0
19.2
39.2
33.1
37.1
36.8
22.4
19.7
23.9
24.7
6.6
7.3
6.2
6.2
6.4
7.0
2.1
1.9
7.0
7.9
17.7*
15.9
13.5
25.4
25.8
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 No information is shown for murder because prior to the Sentencing Act 2002 coming into force on 30 June 2002, life
imprisonment was the mandatory sentence for this offence, and is still the most common sentence.
3 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
4 The average length of custodial sentences is calculated using all custodial sentences, including preventive detention
and life imprisonment. Although preventive detention and life imprisonment are of an indefinite length, a value of 1.5
times the non-parole period imposed has been used in calculations as the approximate equivalent finite sentence. For
example, for a preventive detention sentence with a non-parole period of 12 years, this would be included in
calculations as a finite sentence of 18 years. This is a different methodology to that used prior to 2003, and while it is
applied to all indeterminate sentences included in the data used for this report, some figures in this table cannot be
compared to figures in earlier reports in the series.
The higher maximum penalties for home invasion offences were repealed by the Sentencing
Act 2002. Instead, it became an aggravating factor in sentencing if an offence involved
‘unlawful presences in a dwelling place’. In addition, the Sentencing Act 2002 introduced a
presumption in favour of imposing a minimum non-parole period of at least 17 years on a life
sentence for murder if it involved the ‘unlawful entry into, or unlawful presence in, a dwelling
place’, unless the court was satisfied that this would be ‘manifestly unjust’.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
73
The average length of imprisonment imposed for rape increased by 23% from 87 months in
1997 to 107 months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, this increased by a further 6%, from
99 months to 105 months.
3.5
Sentencing for other offences against the person
This section presents information on the sentencing of all offences against the person other
than violent offences, and gives further information on the use of custodial sentences for
some of the individual offence types included in this category.
Tables 3.10 and 3.11 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving other
offences against the person resulting in each type of sentence from 1997 to 2006. Table
3.10 shows that the number of cases involving non-violent offences against the person
resulting in a custodial sentence ranged from 94 to 124 between 1997 and 2003. Between
2004 and 2006, the figures increased from 127 to 146.
Table 3.10 Number of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
108
260
75
335
7
113
562
172
1
127
1425
113
290
83
373
3
116
579
185
0
196
1565
94
271
85
356
5
106
571
166
4
161
1463
103
212
61
273
3
103
626
193
2
213
1516
109
236
73
309
0
106
617
184
5
192
1522
115
170
116
42
328
0
64
650
195
4
227
1583
124
348
348
61
711
253
7
193
1697
127
331
331
49
715
283
9
273
1787
135
358
358
72
632
314
4
280
1795
146
392
392
72
632
336
1
235
1814
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, extreme caution should be
used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
Table 3.11 shows that the proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for a nonviolent offence against the person decreased from 8% in 1997 to 7% in 2003. Between 2004
and 2006 the proportion increased from 7% to 8%. From 1997 to 2003, the proportion of
cases resulting in a work-related community sentence fluctuated between 18% and 24%.
Between 2004 and 2006, the figures ranged from 19% to 22%.
Both tables show that the use of supervision for other offences against the person generally
declined between 1997 and 2003. From 2004 to 2006, the number of other offences against
the person resulting in supervision increased from 49 cases to 72 cases.
The use of deferred sentences for other offences against the person increased by 42%
between 1997 and 2003. Deferred sentences comprised an increasing proportion of all
conviction outcomes for this offence category between 2004 and 2006, rising from 16% to
74
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
19%. The proportion of other offences against the person resulting in a conviction and
discharge increased from 9% in 1997 to 14% in 2002. In 2004 and 2005, over 15% of these
cases resulted in a conviction and discharge, dropping to 13% in 2006.
Table 3.11
Percentage of convicted cases involving other offences against the
person resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
7.6
7.2
6.4
6.8
7.2
7.3
7.3
7.1
7.5
8.0
10.7 20.5 18.5 19.9 21.6
18.2 18.5 18.5 14.0 15.5
7.3
5.3
5.3
5.8
4.0
4.8
2.7
23.5 23.8 24.3 18.0 20.3 20.7 20.5 18.5 19.9 21.6
0.5
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.0
7.9
7.4
7.2
6.8
7.0
4.0
3.6
2.7
4.0
4.0
39.4 37.0 39.0 41.3 40.5 41.1 41.9 40.0 35.2 34.8
12.1 11.8 11.3 12.7 12.1 12.3 14.9 15.8 17.5 18.5
0.1
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.2
0.1
8.9 12.5 11.0 14.1 12.6 14.3 11.4 15.3 15.6 13.0
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the
figures and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the
number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should
be used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
Table 3.12 shows the number of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
by offence type. Tables 3.13 and 3.14 show the proportion of these cases resulting in a
custodial sentence, and the average sentence length imposed.
Table 3.12 Number of convicted cases involving other offences against the person
by offence type, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Non-violent sexual
Obstruct/resist
Intimidation
Other against
persons
Total
Note:
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
240
856
207
225
938
241
200
822
270
215
861
280
210
819
316
195
892
316
208
903
368
183
963
450
228
907
510
209
962
499
122
161
171
160
177
180
218
191
150
144
1425
1565
1463
1516
1522
1583
1697
1787
1795
1814
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the
figures and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the
number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should
be used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
The number of offences involving obstructing or resisting a Police officer or other official
increased over the decade, but decreased as a proportion of all other offences against the
person. The proportion declined from 60% in 1997 to 53% in 2003, and ranged from 51% to
54% between 2004 and 2007.
The proportion of convicted cases for non-violent sexual offences resulting in a custodial
sentence showed an upward trend between 1997 and 2003 (25% in 1997 to 38% in 2003).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
75
Between 2005 and 2006, the proportion of such cases resulting in imprisonment increased
from 36% to 44%.
Table 3.13 Percentage of convicted cases involving other offences against the
person resulting in a custodial sentence, by offence type, 1997 to 20061
LES
Offence type
Non-violent sexual
Obstruct/resist
Intimidation
Other against
persons
Overall
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
25
2
5
28
2
6
27
1
4
29
1
3
30
2
3
35
1
3
38
1
3
39
2
2
36
1
5
44
1
5
15
10
12
13
12
14
12
16
14
13
8
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
From 1997 to 2003, the proportion of intimidation offences (excluding those involving threats
to kill or do grievous bodily harm) that resulted in a custodial sentence declined from 5% to
3%. The figure was 2% in 2004, increasing to 5% in 2005 and 2006.
Table 3.14 shows that the average length of the custodial sentences imposed for ‘other
offences against the person’ fluctuated over the decade. The overall average length of the
custodial sentences imposed fluctuated between 1997 and 2003 (ranging from 11 to 18
months). From 2004 to 2006, the figures fluctuated over a narrower range from 15 to 17
months.
Table 3.14 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of other
offence against the person, 1997 to 20061,2,3
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Non-violent sexual
Obstruct/resist
Intimidation
Other against
persons
Overall average
16.1
1.4
1.9
25.3
1.7
3.2
17.8
1.0*
2.7
26.3
0.9
2.3*
18.8
1.5
2.0
18.4
1.3
2.4
18.7
1.1*
4.6
20.1
1.3
2.6
19.3
1.2
1.4
22.8
1.3
4.0
11.9
10.3
8.0
8.9
9.8
13.0
12.2
14.8
16.5
15.8
11.2
16.5
12.3
18.2
13.2
14.1
14.9
15.2
14.5
17.1
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 Sentences of preventive detention have been included in the figures for non-violent sexual offences and the overall
average. See the notes to Table 3.9 for further details on this.
3 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
76
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3.6
Sentencing for property offences
Tables 3.15 and 3.16 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving
property offences resulting in each sentence from 1997 to 2006.
Table 3.15 shows that the number of convicted cases involving property offences fluctuated
throughout the decade. The number and proportion of convicted property cases resulting in
a custodial sentence trended upward from 13% in 1997 to 15% in 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, the proportion of property cases resulting in imprisonment remained constant at 17%.
Table 3.15 Number of convicted cases involving property offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
Note:
1997
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2397 2429 2456 2460 2375 2450 2682 3243 3203 3146
4028 7648 7383 6890 7365
5365 5560 5570 5052 5279 2538
2267 2535 2760 2538 2324 1067
7632 8095 8330 7590 7603 7633 7648 7383 6890 7365
136
107
90
70
62
18
1380 1386 1200 1125
891
608
494
541
511
502
5346 5294 5387 5559 5680 5511 5434 5938 5627 5794
1012 1107 1088 1041 1090 1051 1050 1319 1293 1322
20
22
19
26
32
30
22
20
47
25
562
668
646
635
662
720
666
936
870
811
18485 19108 19216 18506 18395 18021 17996 19380 18441 18965
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the
figures and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the
number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should
be used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
Table 3.16 Percentage of convicted cases involving property offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
13.0 12.7 12.8 13.3 12.9 13.6 14.9 16.7 17.4 16.6
22.4 42.5 38.1 37.4 38.8
29.0 29.1 29.0 27.3 28.7 14.1
12.3 13.3 14.4 13.7 12.6
5.9
41.3 42.4 43.3 41.0 41.3 42.4 42.5 38.1 37.4 38.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.1
7.5
7.3
6.2
6.1
4.8
3.4
2.7
2.8
2.8
2.6
28.9 27.7 28.0 30.0 30.9 30.6 30.2 30.6 30.5 30.6
5.5
5.8
5.7
5.6
5.9
5.8
5.8
6.8
7.0
7.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
3.0
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.6
4.0
3.7
4.8
4.7
4.3
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the
figures and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the
number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should
be used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
77
The increasing trend may be partly due to the repeal of section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act
1985. This section required that persons convicted of an offence against property punishable
by imprisonment for a term of seven years or less should not serve a custodial sentence,
unless there were special circumstances. It should be noted that offences with maximum
penalties exceeding seven years’ imprisonment (e.g. burglary and arson) were exempt from
this provision. This provision was repealed by the Sentencing Act 2002. Instead, the
appropriateness of a custodial or community-based sentence is now governed by the
purposes and general principles in Part 1 of the Sentencing Act 2002.
The proportion of property offences resulting in a work-related community sentence
fluctuated between 41% and 43% in the period from 1997 to 2003. Between 2004 and 2006,
the corresponding figure ranged from 37% to 39%.
The use of supervision for property offences declined throughout the decade, with the
proportion falling from 8% in 1997 to 3% in 2003. From 2004 to 2006, the proportion of
property offences resulting in supervision remained at around 3%.
The number of cases involving property offences at each level of offence seriousness and
18
the average seriousness of property offences are presented in Table 3.17. The overall
average seriousness of property offences resulting in a conviction declined from 60 in 1997
to 52 in 2003. The average seriousness scores climbed slightly between 2004 and 2006,
from 54 to 56.
Table 3.17 Number of convicted cases involving property offences with each level of
offence seriousness and average seriousness of property offences, 1997 to
20061,2
LES
CMS
Seriousness score
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
0-1
>1-10
>10-50
>50-100
>100-500
>500
Overall average
2187
4877
3769
3628
4022
2
60
2290
5658
3700
3566
3887
7
58
2178
6428
3544
3420
3642
4
54
2267
6159
3366
3130
3572
12
55
2288
6373
3287
3125
3310
12
52
2343
6123
3331
3040
3173
11
52
2411
5899
3420
3099
3162
5
52
2781
6639
2702
3470
3784
4
54
2792
6287
2397
3311
3633
21
55
3042
6208
2481
3432
3788
14
56
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using the
new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
Table 3.18 shows the number of convicted property cases by offence type. It shows that
convictions for cases involving property offences increased from 1997 to 1999, before
18
78
The seriousness score groupings in the table have little inherent meaning, but are a useful way of
categorising offences—see Section 2.4 for a description of the way these seriousness scores are
calculated.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
trending downwards until 2003. The figures fluctuated around an average of 18,929 between
2004 and 2006. From 1997 to 2003, theft comprised 32% to 35% of all convicted cases
involving property offences. The trend continued from 2004 to 2006, with the proportion of
cases involving theft ranging from 35% to 37%.
Table 3.18 Number of convicted cases involving each property offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
1997
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud
Arson
Wilful damage
Other property
Total
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
3412 3259 3111 3080 2836 2763 2737 3218 3092 3266
5842 6071 6302 6111 6525 6252 6255 6839 6828 6881
1373 1406 1396 1285 1236 1078 1141 1256 1144 1229
1190 1172 1097
940
934
918
958
978
947
922
2860 2928 2763 2564 2448 2380 2244 2179 1883 1905
139
174
130
124
151
128
144
146
145
146
2235 2386 2261 2346 2399 2476 2544 2856 2911 3169
1434 1712 2156 2056 1866 2026 1973 1908 1491 1447
18485 19108 19216 18506 18395 18021 17996 19380 18441 18965
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Figure 3.4 graphs the percentage of property offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence
and the average seriousness of property offences resulting in conviction.
Figure 3.4 Percentage of property offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence,
and average seriousness of property offences resulting in conviction,
1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
30%
25%
80
Average seriousness
60
% of
cases
resulting
in a
custodial
sentence
20%
% of custodial sentences
15%
40
Average
seriousness
10%
20
5%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
0
2006
Year
As Figure 3.4 demonstrates, the increased use of custodial sentences has corresponded with
a general decrease in the seriousness of property offences resulting in a conviction in recent
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
79
years. However, as noted in the case of violent offences, this does not necessarily indicate
that sentencing has become more punitive as the increase in the number of custodial
sentences imposed for property offences may be attributable to other factors not included in
the data (for example, the defendant’s criminal history, including breaches of non-custodial
sentence conditions etc.)
Tables 3.19 and 3.20 present information on the custodial sentencing of property offences.
As noted earlier, burglary and arson were two property offences that section 6 of the Criminal
Justice Act 1985 did not apply to. Table 3.19 shows that the proportion of cases involving
burglary offences resulting in a custodial sentence gradually increased between 1997 and
2003. The proportion ranged from 44% to 47% between 2004 and 2006.
Table 3.19 Percentage of convicted cases involving property offence resulting in a
custodial sentence by offence type, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud
Arson
Wilful damage
Other property
Overall
Note:
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
34
5
9
20
12
44
3
8
13
35
6
10
22
10
39
2
7
13
37
6
11
24
11
52
1
6
13
38
6
10
23
13
42
1
8
13
39
5
10
24
15
50
1
6
13
41
6
11
25
16
57
2
6
14
43
6
15
26
20
41
1
8
15
46
7
16
30
21
56
2
10
17
47
7
19
28
23
51
2
15
17
44
6
17
34
22
52
1
14
17
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Given that arson offences can involve a wide range of seriousness in terms of damage to
property and danger to life, it is not surprising that the proportion of arson cases resulting in a
custodial sentence fluctuated between 39% and 57% from 1997 to 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, the figures ranged between 51% and 56%.
The proportion of burglary and arson cases is substantially higher than for other property
offence types. The proportion of motor vehicle conversion offences receiving custodial
sentences showed an upward movement from 1997 to 2003 (20% to 26%). Between 2004
and 2005, the proportion declined from 30% to 28%, while 34% of motor vehicle conversion
cases resulted in a custodial sentence in 2006.
From 1997 to 2000, 10% to 13% of convicted cases for fraud resulted in a custodial
sentence. The proportion climbed from 15% in 2001 to 20% in 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, 21% to 23% of convicted fraud cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Table 3.20 shows that the average length of the custodial sentences imposed for property
offences increased by three months between 1997 and 2002 (from almost 10 months to 13
months). The average sentence length remained around 11 to 12 months between 2004 and
2006.
80
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.20 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
property offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud
Arson
Wilful damage
Other property
Overall average
Note:
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
12.0
6.2
6.4
6.5
9.3
24.3
4.0
5.0
9.8
12.0
7.1
6.6
6.4
10.4
19.7
3.6
6.4
9.9
12.8
7.4
5.5
7.7
9.1
24.8
2.4
5.0
10.3
14.0
5.7
7.6
7.5
11.0
23.8
6.7
7.1
11.1
14.0
6.5
7.1
8.0
11.3
24.1
6.2
6.3
11.4
15.7
7.3
8.1
8.5
12.2
24.9
4.9
7.1
12.6
15.6
7.8
7.5
9.4
12.5
23.9
4.6
7.1
12.4
15.2
5.4
7.5
8.5
12.0
22.4
4.2
6.3
11.7
2005 2006
14.5
5.7
7.3
8.8
12.8
23.2
4.8
6.2
11.5
14.8
5.6
6.3
8.6
12.4
21.8
4.9
4.9
11.4
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Between 1997 and 2003, with the exception of 1998, the average length of imprisonment for
arson offences was around 24 months. From 2004 to 2006, the average length was between
22 and 23 months.
The custodial sentences imposed for fraud offences generally increased in length from 1997
to 2003 (from 9 months to 12 and a half months). The figures ranged from 12 to 13 months
between 2004 and 2006.
3.7
Sentencing for drug offences
Tables 3.21 and 3.22 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving drug
offences resulting in each type of sentence from 1997 to 2006.
Table 3.21 shows that the number of drug cases resulting in conviction peaked in 1998 at
7,313 cases, and then tracked downward to reach 5,877 in 2003. The downward trend
continued between 2004 and 2006, with the number dropping from 5,798 to 5,028.
The use of work-related community sentences for drug offences varied between 1997 and
2003, with the proportion fluctuating between 29% and 35%. Between 2004 and 2006, the
proportion averaged just over 27%.
Table 3.22 shows that the proportion of convicted cases involving drug offences resulting in
imprisonment increased from 9% in 1997 to 15% in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the
proportion ranged from 16% to 17%. As discussed in Section 2.8, the general increase in the
proportion of drug cases resulting in a custodial sentence can be partly attributed to the
reclassification of methamphetamine in 2003, from a Class ‘B’ drug to a Class ‘A’ drug. This
had the effect of substantially increasing the maximum penalties applicable to
methamphetamine offences.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
81
Table 3.21 Number of convicted cases involving drug offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
639
1465
569
2034
24
283
3523
155
0
159
6817
613
1952
639
2591
15
297
3376
191
2
228
7313
672
1711
535
2246
16
255
3554
164
2
219
7128
704
1571
465
2036
11
233
3382
179
2
274
6821
706
1439
377
1816
11
190
3136
158
6
283
6306
798
860
723
164
1747
1
104
2912
174
4
207
5947
871
1734
1734
69
2780
211
2
210
5877
976
1574
1574
103
2589
208
1
347
5798
898
1434
1434
90
2245
206
4
325
5202
813
1380
1380
97
2181
241
0
316
5028
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.22 Percentage of convicted cases involving drug offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
9.4
8.4
9.4 10.3 11.2 13.4 14.8 16.8 17.3 16.2
14.5 29.5 27.1 27.6 27.4
21.5 26.7 24.0 23.0 22.8 12.2
8.3
8.7
7.5
6.8
6.0
2.8
29.8 35.4 31.5 29.8 28.8 29.4 29.5 27.1 27.6 27.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.0
4.2
4.1
3.6
3.4
3.0
1.7
1.2
1.8
1.7
1.9
51.7 46.2 49.9 49.6 49.7 49.0 47.3 44.7 43.2 43.4
2.3
2.6
2.3
2.6
2.5
2.9
3.6
3.6
4.0
4.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
2.3
3.1
3.1
4.0
4.5
3.5
3.6
6.0
6.2
6.3
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The number of cases involving drug offences within each level of offence seriousness and
the average seriousness of drug offences are presented in Table 3.23. The average
seriousness of drug cases trended upwards between 1997 and 2002, from 68 to 86, before
dropping to 77 in 2003. The overall average level of seriousness of convicted drug cases
increased between 2004 and 2005, rising from 84 to 91, before falling to 86 in 2006.
Changes in the number of convictions for the most serious drug offences (with scores greater
than 500) have heavily influenced the trend in the overall average seriousness of drug
offences, with both showing almost identical patterns.
82
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.23 Number of convicted cases involving drug offences with each level of
offence seriousness and average seriousness of drug offences, 1997 to
20061,2
LES
CMS
Seriousness score
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
0-1
>1-10
>10-50
>50-100
>100-500
>500
Overall average
2361
1323
1917
18
993
205
68
2483
1556
1980
16
1074
204
65
2467
1507
1863
15
1070
206
66
2291
1429
1751
32
1104
214
70
2092
1245
1739
33
994
203
70
1943
1212
1491
56
920
325
86
1826
1365
1537
55
813
281
77
1691
1552
1371
40
836
308
84
1560
1411
1235
11
666
319
91
1444
1539
1119
12
620
294
86
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The seriousness of offence scale was updated in 2005. The figures for each year in this table are calculated using the
new scale, and may differ from figures in earlier publications in this series.
As noted above, changes in the seriousness of drug cases resulting in a conviction may be
one factor associated with the increased proportion of drug cases resulting in a custodial
sentence. Figure 3.5 shows that across the decade both revealed a general upwards trend.
However, in 2006 both the average seriousness score and proportion of drug offence cases
resulting in a custodial sentence dropped slightly.
Figure 3.5
Percentage of drug offence cases resulting in a custodial sentence, and
average seriousness of drug offences resulting in conviction, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
30%
25%
% of
cases
resulting
in a
custodial
sentence
100
Average seriousness
80
20%
60
% of custodial sentences
15%
Average
seriousness
40
10%
20
5%
0%
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
0
2006
Year
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
83
Table 3.24 shows the number of convicted cases by drug offence type. It demonstrates that
from 1997 to 2003, between 85% and 93% of convicted cases for drug offences involved
cannabis. The proportion rose slightly from 78% in 2004 to 79% in 2005, before declining to
76% in 2006.
Table 3.24 Number of convicted cases involving each drug offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Use cannabis
Deal in cannabis
Other cannabis
Use other drug
Deal in other drug
Other drug
Total
2836
2779
674
222
219
87
6817
2912
2928
975
181
217
100
7313
2836
2806
984
207
214
81
7128
2607
2675
922
260
226
131
6821
2293
2551
930
193
218
121
6306
2099
2163
909
222
329
225
5947
1974
2039
961
268
285
350
5877
1811
1845
948
351
314
529
5798
1652
1624
796
316
322
492
5202
1539
1518
782
347
296
546
5028
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Between 1997 and 2003, convictions for drug offences other than cannabis increased by
71% from 528 to 903. Between 2004 and 2006, the total number of non-cannabis
convictions ranged between 1,130 and 1,194, comprising between 21% and 24% of all drug
convictions during this time.
Tables 3.25 and 3.26 include data on custodial sentencing for different types of drug
offences.
Table 3.25 Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type
of drug offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Use cannabis
Deal in cannabis
Other cannabis
Use other drug
Deal in other drug
Other drug
Overall
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2
16
2
4
54
10
9
1
15
1
2
53
2
8
2
17
1
7
60
4
9
1
19
2
5
60
5
10
1
21
2
3
59
7
11
1
22
1
3
78
10
13
1
25
2
6
82
18
15
1
27
2
9
85
25
17
2
25
3
9
93
22
17
2
25
1
8
89
17
16
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
The proportion of convicted cases involving dealing in non-cannabis drugs increased
between 1997 and 2003, from 54% to 82%. In 2006, 89% of such cases received custodial
sentences. This increase is related to a rise in the number of convictions for dealing in
stimulants (especially methamphetamine and amphetamine) and depressants, as well as an
increase in the proportion of these types of offences receiving custodial sentences. As
84
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
discussed in Section 2.8, methamphetamine was reclassified from a Class ‘B’ drug to a Class
‘A’ drug in 2003. As a result, life imprisonment became the maximum penalty for dealing in
methamphetamine.
The proportion of ‘other drug’ cases that resulted in a custodial sentence also increased.
Most of this increase was related to a larger number of convictions for offences involving
possession of equipment capable of producing or cultivating non-cannabis drugs (see
Section 2.8), and an increase in the proportion of these offences receiving custodial
sentences.
Table 3.25 also shows that the proportion of cases involving dealing in cannabis which
resulted in a custodial sentence increased over the decade. From 1997 to 2003, the
proportion of these cases resulting in a custodial sentence increased from 16% to 25%.
Between 2004 and 2006, one-quarter of all convicted cases for dealing in cannabis resulted
in imprisonment. In contrast, the figures show that offenders were very rarely imprisoned for
possession or use of cannabis, with the proportions ranging between 1% and 2% over the
decade.
Table 3.26 shows that the average custodial sentence length imposed on offenders in cases
involving drugs offences has increased over the decade. From 1997 to 2003, the overall
average length was between 16 and 20 months. In 2005, the average length increased to 24
months, before declining to 23 months in 2006.
Table 3.26 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
drug offence, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005 2006
Use cannabis
Deal in cannabis
Other cannabis
Use other drug
Deal in other drug
Other drug
Overall average
1.8
13.4
3.4
1.4*
34.8
3.3*
15.9
1.5
13.1
2.5
32.8
15.8
1.8
14.0
2.0*
4.5
31.5
16.0
1.7
14.2
2.5
6.4
36.1
5.3*
17.5
2.1
15.7
2.2
2.0*
35.1
10.4*
18.3
2.0
14.9
13.3*
8.0*
31.4
8.3
19.5
1.1
15.3
6.4
6.1
33.0
9.4
18.8
2.6
15.6
4.6
3.4
38.3
10.5
20.1
1.9
15.3
5.4
3.8
46.3
12.9
24.3
0.9
15.0
9.9
2.1
42.3
13.6
22.5
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an *
to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
The average custodial sentence length imposed for dealing in cannabis increased from 13 to
15 months between 1997 and 2003. The average ranged between 15 and 16 months from
2004 to 2006.
Between 1997 and 2003, the average length of custodial sentence imposed for dealing in
drugs other than cannabis ranged from 31 to 36 months. The average sentence length for
such offences was 46 months in 2005, declining to 42 months in 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
85
3.8
Sentencing for offences against the administration of justice
This section presents information on the sentencing of cases involving offences against the
administration of justice, and examines the use of custodial sentences for different offence
types within this category. Offences against the administration of justice are mostly:
•
the result of a breach of a sentence imposed for an earlier offence
•
the result of failure to answer bail
•
the result of breach of a protection order
•
offences relating to court procedure.
There are a number of types of breaches of sentences which are not recorded in the data
used for this report. Non-payment of a monetary penalty is a breach of a court-imposed
sentence, but a conviction does not result from non-payment. As part of the procedure for
the enforcement of monetary penalties, people may have an alternative sentence of
community work or, in particular circumstances, imprisonment imposed. The substitution of
an alternative sentence is not recorded in the data utilised in this report.
Offenders who are given a community-based sentence may have their sentence reviewed for
a number of reasons. On review, the sentence may be varied or cancelled and an alternative
sentence substituted. Again, the substitution of an alternative sentence in these
circumstances is not usually recorded in the data used for this report. However, where in
some situations, the offender may simply be charged separately for breaching the conditions
of their sentence. In such circumstances, the breach charge is recorded in the data and is
included in the figures shown below.
Tables 3.27 and 3.28 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving
offences against the administration of justice resulting in each type of sentence from 1997 to
2006.
Table 3.27 shows that convicted cases involving offences against the administration of justice
tracked steadily upwards from 5,456 in 1997 to 6,633 in 2003. The climb continued between
2004 and 2006, reaching 12,819 in 2006.
Table 3.28 shows that the proportion of custodial sentences imposed for offences against the
administration of justice generally trended downwards between 1997 and 2003. The figures
were stable between 2004 and 2006 at almost 10%.
From 1997 to 2002, around half of the convicted cases for offences against the
administration of justice resulted in a work-related community sentence. The proportion
dropped to 38% in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, around one-quarter of such cases
resulted in a work-related community sentence.
From 1997 to 2003, between 3% and 5% of the convicted cases involving offences against
the administration of justice resulted in supervision sentences. The proportion stabilised
between 2004 and 2006 at 2%.
86
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.27 Number of convicted cases involving offences against the administration
of justice resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
797
2281
170
2451
23
247
795
316
4
823
5456
850
2594
180
2774
43
280
718
361
2
852
5880
804
2725
206
2931
22
316
801
375
3
856
6108
729
2838
172
3010
11
271
789
434
6
944
6194
740
2780
191
2971
11
213
860
402
6
1059
6262
618
1489
1402
84
2975
4
188
1299
391
7
1033
6515
669 1076 1195 1206
2534 2778 2900 3320
2534 2778 2900 3320
182
210
249
249
863 1061
855
778
523
629
612
638
4
14
7
7
1858 5612 6740 6621
6633 11380 12558 12819
Note:
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.28 Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against the
administration of justice resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
14.6 14.5 13.2 11.8 11.8
9.5 10.1
9.5
9.5
9.4
22.9 38.2 24.4 23.1 25.9
41.8 44.1 44.6 45.8 44.4 21.5
3.1
3.1
3.4
2.8
3.1
1.3
44.9 47.2 48.0 48.6 47.4 45.7 38.2 24.4 23.1 25.9
0.4
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.1
4.5
4.8
5.2
4.4
3.4
2.9
2.7
1.8
2.0
1.9
14.6 12.2 13.1 12.7 13.7 19.9 13.0
9.3
6.8
6.1
5.8
6.1
6.1
7.0
6.4
6.0
7.9
5.5
4.9
5.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
15.1 14.5 14.0 15.2 16.9 15.9 28.0 49.3 53.7 51.6
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Between 1997 and 2003, monetary penalties were imposed in 12% to 20% of cases involving
offences against the administration of justice. The proportion dropped from 9% in 2004 to
6% in 2006.
Table 3.29 shows the number and proportion of convicted cases for offences against the
administration of justice by offence type. Table 3.30 shows the proportion of cases involving
offences against the administration of justice resulting in a custodial sentence by offence
type, and Table 3.31 presents information on the average custodial sentence length imposed
for different types of offences within this category.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
87
Table 3.29 Number of convicted cases involving each offence against the
administration of justice, 1997 to 20061
LES
Offence type
2
Breach community work
Breach periodic detention
Breach community service
Subtotal - breach work-related
Breach supervision
Breach conditions of release
Failure to answer bail
Breach protection/nonmolestation order3
Escape custody
Obstruct/pervert course of
justice
Other against justice
Total
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
3069
247
3316
300
69
573
3315
205
3520
273
98
534
3366
172
3538
284
98
618
3516
190
3706
248
106
623
3395
168
3563
289
132
648
355
2887
225
3467
259
128
713
3172
433
115
3720
258
293
729
5790
148
24
5962
427
592
2735
6790
53
10
6853
603
811
2518
7398
29
6
7433
615
861
2240
589
887
1033
1009
1075
1010
1055
1058
1116
1072
200
206
197
163
153
118
146
156
165
148
129
102
92
96
82
91
95
114
140
116
280
5456
260
5880
248
6108
243
6194
320
6262
729
6515
337
336
352
334
6633 11380 12558 12819
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 Community work was introduced from 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
3 Non-molestation orders were replaced by protection orders under the Domestic Violence Act 1995.
Table 3.30 Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against the
administration of justice resulting in a custodial sentence, by offence
type, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Breach community work
Breach periodic detention
Breach community service
Subtotal - breach work-related
Breach supervision
Breach conditions of release
Failure to answer bail
Breach protection/nonmolestation order
Escape custody
Obstruct/pervert course of
justice
Other against justice
Overall
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
16
0
15
0
20
11
15
0
14
0
17
11
14
0
13
0
12
13
12
1
12
0
12
11
11
1
11
0
11
12
9
10
0
9
0
13
9
8
9
2
8
4
14
8
10
3
0
10
3
15
3
9
0
0
9
4
12
2
9
0
0*
9
5
13
3
11
13
11
11
14
12
13
15
17
17
50
57
45
37
39
36
27
33
38
24
33
30
39
33
40
41
49
44
54
53
5
15
8
14
3
13
7
12
7
12
3
9
9
10
10
9
11
10
12
9
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
88
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
The Sentencing Act 2002 changed the types of community-based sentences that may be
imposed and the types of sentences that may be breached. While periodic detention and
community service could not be imposed after 29 June 2002, sentences still in force after that
date could still result in breach action being taken. Tables 3.29 to 3.31 include a subtotal for
breaches of work-related community sentences so that the trends are easier to analyse.
The proportion of cases resulting in imprisonment for breaching the conditions of workrelated community sentences declined from 15% in 1997 to 8% in 2003. The corresponding
percentages were 10% in 2004, and 9% in 2005 and 2006.
Prior to the Sentencing Act 2002 coming into force, breaching the conditions of a supervision
sentence was not an imprisonable offence. From 30 June 2002, however, the maximum
penalty for breaching the conditions of a supervision sentence became three months’
imprisonment. In 2006, 5% of convicted cases involving the breach of a supervision
sentence resulted in imprisonment.
The proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for breaching conditions of release
from prison tracked downwards from 1997 to 2001, before increasing slightly in 2002.
Between 2004 and 2006, the proportion ranged from 12% to 15%. It is necessary to note,
however, that prisoners released on parole and some other types of release may be recalled
to prison to continue serving their sentence instead of, or in addition to, being charged with a
breach.
The proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for failure to answer bail also
declined from 13% in 1999 to 8% in 2003. Around 3% of such cases were disposed in this
way in 2006. It is important to note, however, that some people who fail to answer bail may
be remanded in custody for the remainder of the case rather than being charged with failure
to answer bail.
Non-molestation orders were replaced by protection orders when the Domestic Violence Act
1995 came into force on 1 July 1996. The proportion of cases involving breaches of these
orders that resulted in a custodial sentence trended upwards from 11% in 1997 to 13% in
2003. The proportion rose from 15% in 2004 to 17% in 2005 and 2006.
The proportion of cases resulting in a custodial sentence for escaping from lawful custody
steadily declined from 1998 onwards, when 57% of these cases were disposed in this way.
Though the 2005 figures recorded an increase on 2004 (from 33% to 38%), the proportion fell
to 24% in 2006.
The proportion of cases resulting in imprisonment for obstructing or perverting the course of
justice climbed steadily from 33% in 1997 to 49% in 2003. Over half of such cases resulted
in imprisonment in 2005 and 2006.
Table 3.31 shows the average length of the custodial sentences (in months) imposed for
different types of offences against the administration of justice, as well as the total average
length of sentences imposed for all offences against the administration of justice overall.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
89
Table 3.31 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
offence against the administration of justice, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
Offence type
Breach community work
Breach periodic detention
Breach community service
Subtotal - breach workrelated
Breach supervision
Breach conditions of release
Failure to answer bail
Breach protection/nonmolestation order
Escape custody
Obstruct/pervert course of
justice
Other against justice
Overall average
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
1.8
-
1.8
-
1.8
-
1.8
-
1.8
-
1.9
1.6
-
1.6
1.6
-
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.9
1.5
2.1
1.3
2.0
1.6
2.1
1.8
2.1
3.4
2.9
3.3
3.3
4.9
6.5
4.5
9.0
12.4
12.5
2.9
5.0
3.1
2004
2005
2006
1.6
1.7*
-
1.5
-
1.5
-
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.9
1.5
2.4
1.8
1.3
2.1
2.0
2.7
2.2
1.7
2.7
2.5
1.6
3.4
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.8
3.5
5.4
5.6
5.8
6.6
3.8
4.3
4.8
9.8
10.3
9.1
11.5
12.2
11.0
9.9
9.9
3.1*
2.7
7.0
2.9
4.2
2.8
3.8
3.1
10.2
3.6
4.0
2.6
4.6
2.7
6.0
2.6
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
The average length of custodial sentences imposed in cases involving offences against
justice fluctuated between three and four months from 1997 to 2003. The overall average
remained at approximately three months between 2004 and 2006.
After the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Parole Act 2002 came into force on 30 June 2002, the
maximum penalty for breaching the conditions of release from prison increased from three
months’ to one year’s imprisonment. Not surprisingly, therefore, the average length of
custodial sentences imposed for this offence increased from one to two months between
2002 and 2003, and from two months to two and a half months between 2004 and 2006.
The average custodial sentence length imposed for breaching the conditions of a workrelated community sentence was consistently almost two months from 1997 to 2003.
Between 2004 and 2006, the average custodial sentence for such cases was around one and
a half months in duration.
Under the Domestic Violence Act 1995, which came into force in July 1996, the maximum
penalty that may be imposed for breaching a protection order is six months’ imprisonment, or,
if an offender has two previous convictions for similar breaches within the preceding three
years, up to two years’ imprisonment. The average length of custodial sentences imposed
for breaching a protection order ranged from three to four months between 1997 and 2003.
The average custodial sentence length declined from almost four months in 2004 to three
and a half months in 2006.
90
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3.9
Sentencing for offences against good order
This section presents information on the sentencing of all cases involving offences against
good order, and then examines the use of custodial sentences for some individual offences
against good order.
Tables 3.32 and 3.33 respectively show the number and percentage of cases involving
offences against good order resulting in each type of sentence from 1997 to 2006.
Table 3.32 shows that the number of cases involving offences against good order increased
steadily from 1997 to 2003. The 2006 figures recorded a 10% increase from 2005, from
8,697 to 9,571. As Table 3.33 shows, only a very small proportion (around 2%) of cases
involving offences against good order resulted in a custodial sentence.
Table 3.32 Number of convicted cases involving offences against good order
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
141
553
169
722
7
158
3671
610
4
764
6077
153
611
167
778
3
159
3556
696
4
1002
6351
128
678
222
900
10
181
3900
731
9
980
6839
125
588
153
741
4
169
4334
820
3
1062
7258
127
609
191
800
2
142
4910
777
14
1095
7867
139
414
263
63
740
1
107
5200
833
13
1098
8131
148
907
907
85
5767
927
4
1091
8929
173
848
848
100
5530
1077
10
1543
9281
163
895
895
102
5068
1096
10
1363
8697
181
1037
1037
108
5721
1187
9
1328
9571
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The proportion of cases involving offences against good order resulting in a work-related
community sentence fluctuated between 9% and 13% from 1997 to 2003. Between 2004
and 2006, the proportion increased from 9% to 11%.
Supervision was the most serious sentencing outcome for around 3% of convicted cases
involving offences against good order between 1997 and 1999. This proportion fell to 2% in
the next two years and levelled off at 1% in 2002 and 2003. It has subsequently remained at
this level.
Over half of the cases involving an offence against good order resulted in a monetary
penalty. The proportion fluctuated between 56% and 65% between 1997 and 2003, and
levelled off at 60% between 2004 and 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
91
Table 3.33 Percentage of convicted cases involving offences against good order
resulting in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
Note:
1997
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2.3
2.4
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.9
1.9
1.9
5.1 10.2
9.1 10.3 10.8
9.1
9.6
9.9
8.1
7.7
3.2
2.8
2.6
3.2
2.1
2.4
0.8
11.9 12.3 13.2 10.2 10.2
9.1 10.2
9.1 10.3 10.8
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.6
2.5
2.6
2.3
1.8
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.1
60.4 56.0 57.0 59.7 62.4 64.0 64.6 59.6 58.3 59.8
10.0 11.0 10.7 11.3
9.9 10.2 10.4 11.6 12.6 12.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
12.6 15.8 14.3 14.6 13.9 13.5 12.2 16.6 15.7 13.9
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.34 shows the number of convicted cases by offence type. Tables 3.35 and 3.36
present information on the custodial sentences imposed for different types of offences
against good order.
Table 3.34 shows that the offences of possession of an offensive weapon and disorderly
behaviour increased over the decade. From 1997 to 2003, between 54% and 67% of cases
involving offences against good order pertained to disorderly behaviour. In 2006, two-thirds
of convicted cases involving offences against good order involved disorderly behaviour.
Table 3.34 Number of convicted cases involving each offence against good order,
1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Riot
Unlawful assembly
Possess offensive
weapon
Offensive language
Disorderly behaviour
Trespassing
Other against good order
Total
Note:
1997
1998
1999
CMS
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
5
54
2
26
2
16
17
16
10
10
4
17
4
34
10
45
2
25
0
16
692
769
775
705
781
819
894
951
1061
1173
358
3307
1488
173
6077
362
3586
1477
129
6351
421
3938
1573
114
6839
385
4398
1616
121
7258
361
5000
1575
130
7867
341
5175
1663
112
8131
310
5976
1614
97
8929
297
6051
1806
121
9281
228
5593
1695
93
8697
226
6350
1705
101
9571
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The proportion of cases involving unlawful assembly that resulted in a custodial sentence
fluctuated across the period.
92
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.35 Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type
of offence against good order, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Riot
Unlawful assembly
Possess offensive
weapon
Offensive language
Disorderly behaviour
Trespassing
Other against good order
Overall
40*
11
19
13
65
13
20
10
0
0
9
10
7
8
7
8
0
0
4
2
2
0
1
3
1
2
0
0
4
1
2
0
0
3
2
2
0
0
4
0
2
0
0
3
4
2
2004
2005
2006
30
9
4
0
8
9
9
9
0
0
4
5
2
0
0
3
9
2
0
0
3
2
2
0
0
3
6
2
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
Table 3.36 shows that the average length of the custodial sentences imposed for good order
offences overall averaged between three and five months from 1997 to 2003. The overall
average fluctuated between three and four months from 2004 to 2006.
Table 3.36 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
offence against good order, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
Offence type
Riot
Unlawful assembly
Possess offensive
weapon
Offensive language
Disorderly behaviour
Trespassing
Other against good order
Overall average
1997
1998
1999
3.3*
2.2*
-
4.1
5.2
5.9
1.5
1.7
2.9
1.1
1.8
3.4
1.3
1.7
3.8
2000
14.5
-
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
-
-
-
-
-
-
5.5
5.9
4.8
5.4
4.2
4.3
4.3
1.7*
2.4
4.9
1.5*
1.5
3.5
2.0
1.8
3.4
6.1*
1.7
14.0*
4.2
1.7
1.7
15.9
4.0
1.2
1.5
3.2
0.9
1.3
27.3*
3.8
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
93
3.10 Sentencing for traffic offences
Tables 3.37 and 3.38 respectively show the number and percentage of convicted cases
involving traffic offences resulting in each type of sentence from 1997 to 2006.
Table 3.37 Number of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
1725 1788 1788 1580 1557 1635 1626 2122 2162 2070
3970 8164 8263 8519 9563
6852 7347 6724 5389 5507 2410
3829 4190 3628 3085 2927 1321
10681 11537 10352 8474 8434 7701 8164 8263 8519 9563
97
91
59
47
50
10
982
961
779
698
611
347
298
302
328
312
27387 28000 27681 28140 28206 27678 28053 30019 29457 30062
45
56
85
69
68
53
59
84
68
52
747
921 1032 1057 1018 1128 1214 1783 1783 1965
952 1258 1420 2295 2425 2271 2152 2620 2038 1895
42616 44612 43196 42360 42369 40823 41566 45193 44355 45919
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.38 Percentage of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in each
type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
4.0
4.0
4.1
3.7
3.7
4.0
3.9
4.7
4.9
4.5
9.7 19.6 18.3 19.2 20.8
16.1 16.5 15.6 12.7 13.0
5.9
9.0
9.4
8.4
7.3
6.9
3.2
25.1 25.9 24.0 20.0 19.9 18.9 19.6 18.3 19.2 20.8
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
2.3
2.2
1.8
1.6
1.4
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
64.3 62.8 64.1 66.4 66.6 67.8 67.5 66.4 66.4 65.5
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
1.8
2.1
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.8
2.9
3.9
4.0
4.3
2.2
2.8
3.3
5.4
5.7
5.6
5.2
5.8
4.6
4.1
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The use of imprisonment for traffic offences remained consistent from 1997 to 2003, with 4%
of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence each year. The proportion rose to 5% in
the period from 2004 to 2006. Despite only a small proportion of traffic offences resulting in a
custodial sentence, a reasonably large number of people are imprisoned for traffic offending
each year because of the large volume of convictions for these offences. In 2006, there were
94
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
2,070 traffic cases that resulted in a custodial sentence. This represented 20% of the total
custodial sentences imposed in 2006.
Table 3.38 shows that around one-quarter of traffic offences resulted in a work-related
community sentence from 1997 to 1999. The proportion remained stable at around 20%
from 2000 onwards.
The proportion of convicted traffic cases resulting in a supervision sentence dropped from
around 2% in 1997 to 1% in 2002, stabilising at just under 1% for the remainder of the
decade.
Throughout the decade a monetary penalty was the most common penalty imposed for
convicted traffic cases. This was the most serious penalty imposed for two-thirds of
convicted traffic cases. This is principally because a large proportion of convicted traffic
offences involve failure to comply with a prohibition of an enforcement officer, an offence
which typically results in the imposition of a fine (see above Section 2.11).
Table 3.39 shows the number of convicted traffic cases by offence type. Tables 3.40 and
3.41 present data on the proportion of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence for
different types of traffic offence. Between 1997 and 2006, nearly half of the cases involving
traffic offences (between 45% and 48%) involved driving with excess alcohol.
Table 3.39 Number of convicted cases involving each traffic offence by offence type,
1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Driving causing death or
injury
Driving with excess alcohol
Driving while disqualified
Reckless/dangerous driving
Careless driving
Other traffic
Total
Note:
1997
1040
1998
1093
1999
1069
2000
989
CMS
2001
932
2002
935
2003
1021
2004
1072
2005
1096
2006
1105
20282 20421 19589 18904 19756 18452 18703 20191 20593 21558
7861 8605 7547 5753 5450 5012 5105 5615 5646 6200
1633 1790 1862 1612 1701 1866 2202 2868 3049 3189
7011 7695 6915 6257 5735 6057 5492 5457 5416 4998
4789 5008 6214 8845 8795 8501 9043 9990 8555 8869
42616 44612 43196 42360 42369 40823 41566 45193 44355 45919
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The proportion of cases involving driving causing death or injury resulting in imprisonment
increased over the decade. Thus, although only 5% to 8% of such offences resulted in a
custodial sentence from 1997 to 2003, between 2004 and 2006 the corresponding
proportions were between 9% and 10%.
Similarly, the proportion of driving with excess alcohol cases (excluding those cases causing
death or injury) resulting in a custodial sentence rose from 2% to 5% between 1997 and
2003. This increase may be partly explained by a legislative change in early 1999, which
increased the maximum penalty for repeat drunk driving from three months’ to two years’
imprisonment. Between 2004 and 2006, the proportion of driving with excess alcohol cases
resulting in a custodial sentence ranged from 5% to 6%.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
95
Table 3.40 Percentage of convicted cases involving traffic offences resulting in a
custodial sentence by offence type, 1997 to 20061
LES
Offence type
Driving causing death or
injury
Driving with excess alcohol
Driving while disqualified
Reckless/dangerous driving
Careless driving
Other traffic
Overall
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
5
6
6
6
7
8
7
9
9
10
2
15
3
0
0
4
2
14
2
0
0
4
3
14
2
0
0
4
3
15
2
0
0
4
4
14
2
0
0
4
4
14
1
0
0
4
5
13
1
0
0
4
5
15
2
0
0
5
6
15
2
0
0
5
5
13
2
0
0
5
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence is not shown where less than five cases resulted in
conviction. Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in conviction, the percentage shown is marked with
an * to signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
Table 3.41 shows that the average length of custodial sentences imposed for traffic offences
increased from just over five months in 1997 to seven and a half months in 2003. Between
2004 and 2006, the average sentence length remained steady at around seven months.
The average length of the custodial sentences imposed in cases involving driving causing
death or injury fluctuated from year to year. In 2006, the average length of imprisonment
imposed in such cases was 15 months.
Table 3.41 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
traffic offence, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
Offence type
Driving causing death or
injury
Driving with excess alcohol
Driving while disqualified
Reckless/dangerous driving
Careless driving
Other traffic
Overall average
CMS
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
15.5
12.7
13.1
16.7
11.4
14.4
16.5
15.0
13.6
15.0
2.0
6.4
1.9
5.4
2.1
6.6
1.7
5.6
4.0
6.9
3.5
6.1
5.6
7.6
3.2
7.0
5.4
7.5
1.8
6.6
6.5
8.1
2.3
7.5
6.1
7.5
2.2
3.7
6.9
5.9
7.0
2.1
2.3
6.6
6.0
7.4
2.3
2.1
6.8
6.0
8.3
1.9
2.6*
7.3
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
The average length of custodial sentences imposed for driving with excess alcohol increased
from four months in 1999 to five and a half months in 2000. This change can, at least in part,
be attributed to the legislative change in 1999 outlined above. From 2000 onwards, the
96
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
average length of custodial sentence imposed for such offences remained stable at around
six months.
A sentencing structure similar to that for driving with excess alcohol also exists for driving
while disqualified offences. Prior to the Land Transport Act 1998, the maximum penalty for
driving while disqualified (excluding cases resulting in death and injury) was three months’
imprisonment for the first offence, and for repeat offenders the maximum was five years’
imprisonment. The Land Transport Act reduced the maximum penalty for offenders
convicted of a third or subsequent driving while disqualified offence from five to two years’
imprisonment. Despite this reduction, the average length of custodial sentence imposed for
driving while disqualified offences has continued to increase – reaching eight months in 2002
and 2003. This was the longest average custodial sentence length recorded for driving while
disqualified offences during the decade. The average length of custodial sentence ranged
from seven to seven and a half months between 2004 and 2006.
This increase, however, may be partly artificial. In cases where a drunk driver is also found
to be a disqualified driver, and is convicted on both offences, there has been a shift in the
sentences imposed in recent years, with large increases in the sentences imposed for the
drunk driving offence. This has meant that the major offence in some cases involving both
drunk driving and driving while disqualified is now defined as driving with excess alcohol. In
cases that still have driving while disqualified recorded as the most serious offence, the
driving while disqualified offence is likely to be a more serious offence of this kind. It would
therefore be anticipated that the average sentence imposed for driving while disqualified
would be longer. The figures presented in Table 3.41 suggest that this has been the case.
3.11
Sentencing for miscellaneous offences
The majority of the miscellaneous offences are non-imprisonable. Consequently, only a
small proportion of such offences result in imprisonment. Tables 3.42 and 3.43 respectively
provide the number and percentage of convicted cases involving miscellaneous offences
resulting in each sentence type. Table 3.43 shows that the proportion of miscellaneous
offences resulting in imprisonment was between 1% and 2% from 1997 to 2003, while the
proportion ranged from 2% to 3% between 2004 and 2006.
The proportion of miscellaneous offences resulting in community-based sentences fluctuated
between 5% and 8% from 1997 to 2003. Around 6% of miscellaneous offences resulted in
the imposition of a work-related community sentence between 2004 and 2006.
During the decade, a monetary penalty was the most frequent outcome for convicted cases
involving a miscellaneous offence. Between 2004 and 2006, around 80% of convicted cases
involving miscellaneous offences resulted in the imposition of a monetary penalty.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
97
Table 3.42 Number of convicted cases involving miscellaneous offences resulting in
each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
65
141
116
257
2
45
4072
68
1
448
4958
84
223
122
345
1
35
3568
74
1
529
4637
55
172
135
307
0
50
3545
89
2
426
4474
69
162
87
249
1
37
2363
53
0
242
3014
76
175
80
255
0
30
2534
72
1
210
3178
93
158
78
65
301
0
16
3193
70
1
242
3916
109
388
388
16
5071
75
2
472
6133
124
387
387
10
4840
85
4
474
5924
165
349
349
20
4555
83
0
591
5763
202
422
422
31
6089
98
1
684
7527
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.43 Percentage of convicted cases involving miscellaneous offences resulting
in each type of sentence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Sentence type
1997
Custodial
Community work
Periodic detention
Community service
Subtotal - work-related
Community programme
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
1.3
1.8
1.2
2.3
2.4
2.4
1.8
2.1
2.9
2.7
4.0
6.3
6.5
6.1
5.6
2.8
4.8
3.8
5.4
5.5
2.0
2.3
2.6
3.0
2.9
2.5
1.7
5.2
7.4
6.9
8.3
8.0
7.7
6.3
6.5
6.1
5.6
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.2
0.9
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.4
82.1 76.9 79.2 78.4 79.7 81.5 82.7 81.7 79.0 80.9
1.4
1.6
2.0
1.8
2.3
1.8
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
9.0 11.4
9.5
8.0
6.6
6.2
7.7
8.0 10.3
9.1
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.44 shows the number of convicted cases by offence type. Tables 3.45 and 3.46
present data on the custodial sentencing of different offence types within the miscellaneous
offence category.
Between 1997 and 2003, the proportion of convictions for miscellaneous cases concerning
liquor-related offences ranged from 4% to 22%. In 2006, over half (56%) of the convictions
for miscellaneous cases were liquor-related offences.
The proportion of cases involving offences under the Arms Act 1983 that resulted in a
custodial sentence fluctuated from 10% to 17% between 1997 and 2003. The proportion
98
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
rose from 13% in 2004 to 16% in 2006. Between 1997 and 2003, the average length of
custodial sentence imposed for such offences fluctuated between 8 months and 12 months.
In 2006, the average length of sentence imposed was ten and a half months.
Table 3.44 Number of convicted cases involving each miscellaneous offence, 1997 to
2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Arms Act
Dog Control Act
Tax Act
Liquor-related
Fisheries Act
Other miscellaneous
Total
410
1433
597
785
99
1634
4958
445
771
551
1010
150
1710
4637
451
485
432
977
197
1932
4474
361
341
501
156
263
1392
3014
340
411
625
140
317
1345
3178
333
293
596
209
348
2137
3916
382
449
778
1071
484
2969
6133
410
221
599
2967
460
1267
5924
395
245
701
2544
361
1517
5763
450
201
836
4248
307
1485
7527
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 3.45 Percentage of convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type
of miscellaneous offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Arms Act
Dog Control Act
Tax Act
Liquor-related
Fisheries Act
Other miscellaneous
Overall
13
0
0
0
0
1
1
14
0
0
0
0
1
2
10
0
0
0
0
1
1
16
0
0
0
0
1
2
16
0
0
0
0
1
2
17
0
0
0
4
1
2
14
0
1
0
0
2
2
13
0
3
0
0
4
2
14
0
3
0
1
6
3
16
0
3
0
1
7
3
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
In the period from 1997 to 2003, the average length of custodial sentence imposed for
miscellaneous offences overall has fluctuated between 8 months and 13 months. The figures
increased between 2004 and 2006, from 9 months to 12 months.
In more recent years, an increasing proportion of cases involving offences under the Tax Act
resulted in a custodial sentence. Between 2004 and 2006, 3% of convicted cases involving
these offences resulted in imprisonment. The average length of the custodial sentence
imposed for such offences fluctuated between 10 and 16 months.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
99
Table 3.46 Average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), by type of
miscellaneous offence, 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Arms Act
Dog Control Act
Tax Act
Liquor-related
Fisheries Act
Other miscellaneous
Overall average
10.0
6.1
9.2
8.3
5.7
7.5
9.4
11.2
9.7
10.5
3.4*
9.7
8.1
8.0
7.9
12.2
23.5
7.8
12.6
11.5
9.3*
6.4
8.9
8.4
15.8
7.0
8.6
11.3
10.0
9.4
10.1
2006
10.6
12.1
13.7
12.3
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The average custodial sentence length is not shown where less than five cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
Where at least five but fewer than ten cases resulted in a custodial sentence, the figure shown is marked with an * to
signify that it must be treated with caution as it is calculated from a small number of cases.
3.12 Sentences imposed in each court in 2006 for all offences
Table 3.47 shows the most serious sentence imposed for every case finalised in each court
in 2006. In locations where there is a District and a High Court, the conviction figures from
the two courts have been combined to form a single total.
Of the 112,774 cases resulting in a conviction in 2006, 111,875 (99%) were finalised in a
19
District Court, and 860 (1%) were finalised in a High Court.
Variation in the types of offences dealt with by individual courts (see Table 2.15) partly
explains disparities in the sentences recorded for different courts. In addition, the availability
of corrections facilities and services (e.g. work centres or programmes such as those to treat
drug- or alcohol-related problems) in a location can affect which types of sentence are
imposed. As noted in Chapter 2, some charges must be tried before a jury if the defendant
pleads not guilty. Other charges can be tried before a judge alone, but the defendant can
elect a jury trial. The least serious charges must be tried before a judge alone. If a person is
charged with an offence that must be tried by a jury, but the closest court does not hold jury
trials (e.g. Levin District Court), the case will be transferred to another court that holds such
trials. For this reason, some of the more serious offences that were committed in locations
such as Levin will appear in figures for other courts, and, as a consequence, may artificially
exaggerate sentencing differences between courts.
19
100
The table excludes three cases where a custodial sentence was imposed, but the location is unknown
due to incorrect data coding.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 3.47 Most serious sentence imposed for all convicted cases finalised in each
court location, 20061,2
Custodial
Court
Kaitaia
Kaikohe*
Whangarei*
Dargaville
Warkworth
Auckland*
Waitakere
North Shore
Manukau*
Papakura
Pukekohe
Thames
Huntly
Waihi
Morrinsville
Hamilton*
Te Awamutu
Tauranga*
Whakatane
Opotiki
Ruatoria
Tokoroa
Rotorua*
Te Kuiti
Taupo
Gisborne*
Wairoa
Taumaranui
New Plymouth*
Taihape
Napier*
Hastings
Hawera
Wanganui*
Marton
Waipukurau
Dannevirke
Feilding
Palmerston North*
Levin
Masterton
Porirua
Upper Hutt
Lower Hutt
Wellington*
Chatham Islands
Communitybased3
Monetary
Other
Conviction &
discharge
Total
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
89
150
359
29
10
1039
231
268
773
128
89
27
35
29
31
753
20
558
158
36
1
56
374
18
92
236
22
33
262
22
381
298
66
293
18
13
20
40
350
84
49
95
35
83
389
0
12
12
12
9
2
10
5
7
9
7
7
4
7
2
5
14
6
11
11
10
1
6
12
5
7
10
6
10
10
8
14
12
7
17
5
5
8
8
13
8
4
4
4
4
11
0
224
412
796
125
70
1965
1233
861
2248
569
372
201
161
225
158
1354
99
1251
486
171
54
317
939
128
297
704
104
125
788
79
765
755
368
586
83
89
85
134
770
331
363
693
255
695
752
8
30
32
26
37
17
18
25
22
25
31
29
28
30
19
26
25
28
25
32
47
48
32
29
36
22
30
29
36
29
29
29
30
38
34
25
32
34
28
28
32
27
32
27
29
22
30
297
504
1523
133
288
5621
2080
2275
3994
702
607
392
269
872
343
2637
205
2487
675
113
43
358
1075
168
625
1084
181
143
1150
155
1112
1067
383
556
161
134
109
232
1310
429
611
945
400
992
1576
15
40
39
50
39
68
52
42
57
44
39
47
55
51
75
56
49
58
50
45
31
38
37
33
47
47
46
51
42
43
57
42
43
39
32
49
48
44
49
47
41
45
44
42
42
46
56
43
66
143
20
25
845
536
257
571
133
101
43
36
19
29
267
13
252
70
15
3
92
256
16
124
129
33
30
114
11
146
134
44
95
29
14
10
22
151
94
108
213
110
272
306
1
6
5
5
6
6
8
11
6
6
7
8
6
7
2
5
5
4
5
5
4
3
9
8
5
9
5
9
9
4
4
5
5
5
5
9
5
4
5
5
9
8
10
11
11
9
4
82
151
222
34
31
1436
862
304
1390
282
118
56
31
24
51
390
15
409
109
28
11
157
574
25
195
200
15
12
370
7
262
229
116
214
39
32
25
45
212
98
225
218
158
327
421
3
11
12
7
10
7
13
17
8
15
16
9
8
6
2
8
7
4
8
7
8
10
16
18
7
15
8
4
3
14
3
10
9
12
12
12
11
10
10
8
9
17
10
16
14
12
11
735
1283
3043
341
424
10906
4942
3965
8976
1814
1287
719
532
1169
612
5401
352
4957
1498
363
112
980
3218
355
1333
2353
355
343
2684
274
2666
2483
977
1744
330
282
249
473
2793
1036
1356
2164
958
2369
3444
27
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Continued next page
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
101
Custodial
Court
Nelson*
Blenheim*
Westport
Greymouth*
Kaikoura
Christchurch*
Rangiora
Whataroa
Ashburton
Timaru*
Oamaru
Queenstown
Alexandra
Dunedin*
Gore
Balclutha
Invercargill*
Total
Community3
based
Monetary
Other
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
207
81
10
34
2
1085
27
0
22
121
23
11
11
356
27
10
297
10469
9
7
4
6
3
12
4
0
5
10
4
2
2
11
6
4
12
9
755
298
64
171
15
2264
170
5
127
306
127
77
77
856
117
50
712
29439
32
26
27
28
20
25
25
17
30
24
23
13
14
25
26
22
28
26
1022
594
117
322
49
4425
408
22
209
672
317
426
421
1611
235
136
1190
53207
43
53
50
53
66
49
59
73
49
53
58
70
74
48
53
59
47
47
129
53
26
54
6
482
42
0
26
66
40
32
18
181
32
15
163
7406
Conviction &
discharge
%
5
5
11
9
8
5
6
0
6
5
7
5
3
5
7
6
6
7
No.
245
100
16
24
2
725
39
3
41
100
42
62
39
378
36
21
165
12253
%
10
9
7
4
3
8
6
10
10
8
8
10
7
11
8
9
7
11
Total
No.
%
2358
1126
233
605
74
8981
686
30
425
1265
549
608
566
3382
447
232
2527
112774
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Notes:
1 The figures in this table are case-based.
2 The courts marked with an * have a High Court and/or hold District Court jury trials.
3 Community-based sentences include community work and supervision.
Due to the small number of cases, Chatham Islands, Whataroa and Kaikoura have not been
used for comparison with other locations. Table 3.47 shows that Auckland processed the
highest total of cases in 2006 at 10,906. Other key trends for most serious sentence
imposed for all convicted cases finalised in 2006 were as follows:
102
•
The proportion of all convicted cases that resulted in a custodial sentence in each
location ranged from 1% in Ruatoria, to 17% in Wanganui. The national average was
9%.
•
The proportion of convicted cases receiving community-based sentences ranged from
13% of cases convicted in Queenstown to 48% of cases convicted in Ruatoria. This
compared to 26% of all cases in New Zealand in 2006.
•
In 2006, monetary penalties were imposed as the most serious sentence for 31% of
cases in Opotiki, while in Waihi most cases resulted in a monetary penalty (75%). In New
Zealand as a whole, 47% of cases resulted in monetary penalties.
•
Overall, a total of 7% of cases in New Zealand resulted in ‘other’ sentences being
imposed. In Waitakere, Upper Hutt, Lower Hutt and Westport, 11% of cases received
‘other’ sentences, compared to 3% in Ruatoria and Alexandra.
•
In 2006, 18% of cases sentenced in Rotorua resulted in a conviction and discharge. The
proportions in the other regions were lower than this, with the lowest figure recorded in
Waihi, where 2% of cases resulted in a conviction and discharge. The national average
was 11%.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
3.13 Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders
This section of the report presents information on the gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders
that were sentenced in 2006. Although not examined in this report, some of the differences
in sentencing seen by gender, age, and ethnicity will be due to differences in the types and
seriousness of offences committed, differences in offending histories, as well as other
factors. As discussed in Section 1.5, the way ethnicity data is collected has implications on
its data quality.
Tables 3.48 to 3.49 respectively present information on the gender and age of offenders who
received each type of sentence in 2006. Excluded from these tables were 931 cases where
a conviction was entered against a corporation.
Table 3.50 presents information on the ethnicity of offenders who received each type of
sentence in 2006. Excluded from this table were 931 cases where a conviction was entered
against a corporation.
Table 3.48 shows that the majority of the offenders convicted in 2006 were male (82%).
Male offenders were also more likely to be sent to prison than females, with 10% of all
convicted males receiving custodial sentences, compared to 5% of all convicted females.
This disparity is likely to be partially explained by differences in the seriousness of offending
and offending histories. The figures show that one in ten cases resulting in a custodial
sentence in 2006 involved female offenders, while nine in ten cases receiving custodial
sentences involved male offenders.
Table 3.48 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and gender of the offender, 2006
Male
Female
Most serious sentence
No.
%
No.
%
Custodial
Community work
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction & discharge
Total
9412
21947
1738
42870
3975
1678
9666
91286
90
81
78
82
75
81
80
82
1040
5209
504
9381
1352
381
2393
20260
10
19
22
18
25
19
20
18
Note:
Unknown
Total
No.
No.
17
40
1
177
13
2
47
297
10469
27196
2243
52428
5340
2061
12106
111843
Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where gender was not known.
Female offenders accounted for about one-fifth of community work and supervision
sentences imposed in 2006.
Table 3.49 shows that cases involving offenders in their twenties accounted for 41% of the
cases that resulted in a custodial sentence in 2006, with a further 12% of such cases
involving offenders aged 17 to 19. Of the 1,316 cases involving teenagers that resulted in a
custodial sentence, 98% involved offenders aged 17 to 19. One in five offenders receiving a
custodial sentence in 2006 was aged 40 years or over.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
103
Table 3.49 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and age of the offender, 2006
Unknown
Total
%
No.
No.
20
17
19
19
25
18
35
105
12
370
19
2
10469
27196
2243
52428
5340
2061
2005 17
96
12106
21 26967 24 15805 14 23444 21 20798 19
639
111843
Most serious
sentence
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
No. %
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
Custodial
Community work
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction &
discharge
Total
30
21
7
304
3
32
0
0
0
1
0
2
1286
5618
387
12696
824
606
12
21
17
24
15
29
2456
6662
438
12723
1034
469
24
25
20
24
19
23
1822
4057
351
6768
734
254
17
15
16
13
14
12
2747
6129
613
9627
1381
322
26
23
27
18
26
16
2093
4604
435
9940
1345
376
95
1
2281
492
0
23698
Note:
19 3185 27
1819 15
2625 22
40+
Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where age was not known.
Offenders under 25 years of age accounted for 46% of the cases resulting in a communitywork sentence in 2006.
In 2006, nearly two-thirds (304 out of 492) of the cases involving offenders aged 14 to 16
resulted in the imposition of a monetary penalty. For offenders in other age groups, the
proportion resulting in a monetary penalty was much closer to a half.
Table 3.50 shows that for convicted cases in 2006, where the person’s ethnicity was
recorded, 45% involved NZ European offenders, 43% involved Mäori offenders, 9% involved
Pacific offenders, and 3% involved offenders from other ethnic groups.
Table 3.50 Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and ethnicity of the offender, 20061,2
Pacific
peoples
Most serious
sentence
NZ European
Mäori
No.
%
No.
%
No.
Custodial
Community work
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction &
discharge
Total
3643
10256
902
22058
2108
877
37
41
42
51
41
51
5298
12138
1003
15559
2291
654
53
49
47
36
44
38
723
2072
210
4052
600
121
3845
37
5054
48
43689
45
41997
43
Other
%
Unknown
Total
No.
%
No.
No.
7
8
10
9
12
7
256
450
35
1789
159
66
3
2
2
4
3
4
549
2280
93
8970
182
343
10469
27196
2243
52428
5340
2061
1322
13
274
3
1611
12106
9100
9
3029
3
14028
111843
Notes:
1
Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data
quality.
2
Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where ethnicity was not known.
In 2006, Mäori accounted for over half (53%) of the cases resulting in imprisonment, while
37% involved NZ Europeans, 7% involved Pacific peoples, and 3% involved persons from
‘Other’ ethnic groups. In 2006, 13% of all convicted cases involving Mäori resulted in
imprisonment, compared to 8% of cases involving NZ Europeans, 8% involving Pacific
peoples, and 8% involving persons from ‘Other’ ethnic groups.
104
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Mäori offenders accounted for 49% of the cases resulting in a community work sentence in
2006, while 41% involved NZ Europeans, 8% Pacific peoples, and 2% persons from ‘Other’
ethnic groups.
In 2006, 51% of cases involving NZ European offenders resulted in the imposition of a
monetary penalty. For cases involving Mäori and Pacific peoples, the proportion that
received a monetary penalty was lower at 37% and 45% respectively. For cases involving
offenders from ‘Other’ ethnicities, 59% resulted in fines and/or reparation as the most serious
sentence.
Table A2 in Appendix A presents information on the ethnicity of offenders who received each
type of sentence in 2005. 751 cases where a conviction was entered against a corporation
were excluded from this table. 20 The proportion of Mäori, NZ Europeans, and Pacific peoples
receiving each type of sentence in 2005 was similar to the proportions found in 2006.
3.14 Summary of key findings
The key findings for this chapter are as follows:
•
Between 2004 and 2006, the number of convicted cases increased by 3%, from 109,017
to 112,774.
•
Between 1997 and 2002, 8% of convicted cases resulted in a custodial sentence.
However, in 2003 9% of convicted cases did so, and between 2004 and 2006, an
average of 10% of convicted cases each year had custodial sentences imposed.
•
During the decade, the proportion of custodial sentences imposed increased for violent
offences, property, drug and miscellaneous offences. The proportion of custodial
sentences decreased for offences against the administration of justice.
•
Between 1998 and 2003, the proportion of convicted cases resulting in a work-related
community sentence declined. From 2004 to 2006, 23% to 24% of all cases resulted in a
work-related community sentence being imposed as the most serious sentence.
•
Between 1997 and 2006, the proportion of work-related community sentences imposed
generally declined for other offences against the person, offences against the
administration of justice, property, drug, and traffic offences.
•
During the decade, around half of all convicted cases resulted in the imposition of a
monetary penalty.
•
The average length of custodial sentences imposed for property, drug and traffic offences
generally increased during the decade.
20
Problems with the electronic transfer of 2005 ethnicity data were identified last year where a larger
proportion of defendants had unknown ethnicity in their records than in previous years. While the
problems were under investigation, the 2004 ethnicity data were presented in the 2005 report titled
‘Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1996–2005’.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
105
106
•
In 2006, 10% of convicted cases involving males resulted in imprisonment compared to
5% of cases involving females.
•
Cases involving offenders aged 20 to 29 accounted for 41% of custodial sentences
imposed during 2006, while cases involving those aged 14 to 19 comprised 13%.
•
In 2006, Mäori offenders accounted for 53% of cases resulting in imprisonment. A further
37% of cases resulting in custodial sentences involved NZ European offenders, 7%
involved Pacific offenders, and 3% involved offenders from other ethnic groups.
•
In 2006, 13% of convicted cases involving Mäori offenders resulted in imprisonment,
while 8% of cases involving NZ Europeans and Pacific peoples had custodial outcomes.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
4
Custodial sentences and remands
4.1
Introduction
This chapter examines the use of custodial sentences between 1997 and 2006 in more
depth. It expands on the information provided in Chapter 3 and provides additional
information on:
•
the average number of males and females in prison at any one time over the decade
•
the lengths of prison sentences imposed over the decade
•
the lengths of non-parole periods imposed on life imprisonment and preventive detention
sentences.
The first part of this chapter provides information on the different types of offences resulting
in a custodial sentence. It explores the number and proportion of custodial sentences
imposed for each offence category. It also presents data on the total number of sentences of
different lengths, including the number of life imprisonment and preventive detention
sentences imposed, as well as the number of corrective training sentences imposed until this
sentence was abolished in 2002.
The second part of this chapter presents data on the non-parole periods imposed for
indeterminate sentences. It examines trends in the length of non-parole periods imposed on
life sentences, before investigating changing lengths of non-parole periods imposed on
preventive detention sentences.
The third part of this chapter provides information on the annual average number of
prisoners. It examines the composition of the prison population, identifying trends in the
number and proportion of remand and sentenced prisoners. It also provides an analysis of
the gender, age, and ethnicity of persons sent to prison in 2006, highlighting key intersections
between these variables.
The fourth section of this chapter explores custodial remands in more depth. It provides
information on the number and proportion of cases in 2006 involving a custodial remand by
offence category, as well as the number and proportion of these that subsequently resulted in
a custodial sentence. In addition, it presents data on the length of time spent on custodial
remand and the overall proportion of each case that was spent on remand between 2004 and
2006.
The final section provides a summary of the key findings from the chapter.
Before trends in custodial sentences can be discussed, however, it is first necessary to clarify
the nature of data used in this chapter and outline the key legislative changes that are likely
to have impacted on custodial sentencing data during this time.
The information presented in this chapter is case-based. As outlined in Chapter 1, the
system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from the LES to CMS). This may have
caused changes in the figures and trends that are observed prior to 2003 and following 2004.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
107
In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in
offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be exercised when making inferences based
on any change between 2003 and 2004.
The custodial sentences available in New Zealand are:
•
life imprisonment
•
preventive detention
•
determinate sentences of imprisonment.
Corrective training was also available until it was abolished on 30 June 2002 by the
Sentencing Act 2002.
21
The length of sentence actually served (that is, the total time spent in custody ) may differ
from the sentence length imposed. Over the decade, the Criminal Justice Act 1985, and,
more recently, the Parole Act 2002, governed the proportion of the court-imposed sentence
that an offender was required to serve. Legislative requirements regarding the length of
sentence served have changed over time.
Life imprisonment and preventive detention are both indeterminate sentences (i.e. they do
not have a fixed expiry date). Prior to the commencement of the Sentencing Act 2002, the
mandatory penalty for murder was life imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 10
years or longer at the court’s discretion. Preventive detention, which was available for
serious sexual and violent offending (although imposed almost solely for sexual offending)
also had a minimum non-parole period of 10 years or longer at the court’s discretion.
Throughout the decade, life imprisonment was the mandatory sentence for treason. It was
also the maximum penalty (although rarely used) for manslaughter and dealing in Class A
controlled drugs, as well as certain offences under Acts such as:
•
Aviation Crimes Act 1972
•
Armed Forces Discipline Act 1971
•
Chemical Weapons (Prohibition) Act 1996
•
Terrorism Suppression Act 2002.
Mandatory minimum non-parole periods on life sentences are only prescribed for murder.
The Sentencing Act 2002 changed the sentencing framework for murder. Life imprisonment
is no longer the mandatory penalty for murder under the Act, although there remains a strong
22
presumption in favour of life imprisonment. If the court imposed life imprisonment for
21
22
108
Many offenders serve a period of custodial remand prior to being sentenced. Time spent on remand is
counted as time served against any sentence of imprisonment subsequently imposed.
Section 102 of the Sentencing Act 2002 provides that life imprisonment must be imposed for murder
unless, given the circumstances of the offence and the offender, a life sentence would be manifestly
unjust.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
murder, it must impose a minimum non-parole period of at least 10 years. In cases involving
specified serious aggravating factors, section 104 of the Act provides that the court must
imposed a non-parole period of at least 17 years, unless satisfied that it would be manifestly
unjust to do so.
The Sentencing Act 2002 also made changes to preventive detention. The Act:
•
extended the range of qualifying offences, especially with respect to violent offences
•
removed the requirement of a conviction for previous specified offences, which applied
unless the offender was convicted of a sexual violation
•
lowered the mandatory minimum non-parole period from 10 to 5 years
•
lowered the age of eligibility from 21 to 18 years at the time of conviction.
Determinate sentences of imprisonment are sentences with a fixed term that can be imposed
at the discretion of the court up to a maximum period expressed in legislation.
Corrective training, which was abolished in 2002, was a three-month custodial sentence for
young people aged 16 to 19 years. The sentence involved hard physical work and strict
discipline for three months, followed by six months of supervision.
Earlier reports in this series have included analysis of community-based sentences (mostly
supervision) imposed cumulatively on custodial sentences, as well as the use of suspended
23
sentences of imprisonment. The Sentencing Act 2002 removed both these sentencing
options. Consequently, they are no longer examined in detail in this publication.
4.2
Types of offences resulting in custodial sentences
Table 4.1 shows that the total number of cases resulting in custodial sentences fluctuated
between 1997 and 2003 averaging around 8,100 cases each year. Between 2004 and 2006,
the figures averaged around 10,500 cases annually. As discussed in Section 3.2, the figures
presented in this report for custodial sentences do not include cases where an offender
received a suspended sentence of imprisonment prior to the abolition of this sentencing
option on 30 June 2002. The figures also exclude cases in which a suspended sentence was
activated due to reoffending within the suspension period—although the person was often at
the same time imprisoned for the subsequent offence that led to the activation, which is
included in the data used in this section.
From 1997 to 2003, between 26% and 28% of custodial sentences were imposed in cases
involving violent offences (see Table 4.2). These cases accounted for 26% of custodial
sentences imposed in 2006.
23
While supervision can no longer be imposed in addition to a sentence of imprisonment, under section 93
of the Sentencing Act 2002, the court can impose standard and/or special conditions on release of an
offender sentenced to imprisonment for two years or less. Release from sentences of more than two
years is subject to conditions imposed by the New Zealand Parole Board.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
109
Over the decade, nearly one-third of custodial sentences were imposed in cases involving
property offences each year, and around half involved either property or traffic offences.
Table 4.1
Total number of cases resulting in a custodial sentence, by type of
offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
2230
108
2397
639
797
141
1725
65
8102
2225
113
2429
613
850
153
1788
84
8255
2180
94
2456
672
804
128
1788
55
8177
2116
103
2460
704
729
125
1580
69
7886
2115
109
2375
706
740
127
1557
76
7805
2082
115
2450
798
618
139
1635
93
7930
2268 2512 2632 2705
124
127
135
146
2682 3243 3203 3146
871
976
898
813
669 1076 1195 1206
148
173
163
181
1626 2122 2162 2070
109
124
165
202
8497 10353 10553 10469
Note:
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 4.2
Percentage of cases resulting in a custodial sentence involving each type
of offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
1997
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
27.5 27.0 26.7 26.8 27.1 26.3 26.7 24.3 24.9 25.8
1.3
1.4
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.3
1.4
29.6 29.4 30.0 31.2 30.4 30.9 31.6 31.3 30.4 30.1
7.9
7.4
8.2
8.9
9.0 10.1 10.3
9.4
8.5
7.8
9.8 10.3
9.8
9.2
9.5
7.8
7.9 10.4 11.3 11.5
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.5
1.7
21.3 21.7 21.9 20.0 19.9 20.6 19.1 20.5 20.5 19.8
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.6
1.9
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The proportion of custodial sentences imposed for drug offences increased from around 8%
during the first three years of the decade, to 10% in 2002 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006,
8% to 9% of all cases resulting in a custodial sentence involved drug offences.
The proportion of cases resulting in custodial sentences that involved offences against justice
ranged from 8% to 10% from 1997 to 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the proportion of cases
resulting in imprisonment that involved such offences rose from 10% to 12%.
For more detailed discussion of these trends refer to Sections 3.4 to 3.11.
110
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
4.3
Custodial sentence lengths imposed
Table 4.3 shows the total number of custodial sentences of various lengths and the average
custodial sentence length imposed between 1997 and 2006.
Table 4.3
Total number of custodial sentences imposed of various lengths, and
average custodial sentence length imposed (in months), 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Custodial sentence length
imposed
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Corrective training3
<=3 months4
>3 to 6 months
>6 to 12 months
>1 to 2 years
>2 to 3 years
>3 to 5 years
>5 to 7 years
>7 to 10 years
>10 years
Life imprisonment
Preventive detention
Total
Overall average5
424
2562
1451
1585
1097
381
322
131
80
22
37
10
8102
13.5
369
2641
1494
1546
1165
428
338
128
90
23
24
9
8255
13.5
350
2422
1592
1570
1175
445
346
140
75
21
23
18
8177
13.8
225
1989
1642
1601
1339
474
355
99
101
19
29
13
7886
14.7
147
2000
1705
1586
1313
444
362
112
73
35
19
9
7805
14.4
27
1728
1679
1880
1427
539
375
111
96
31
27
10
7930
15.6
1746 2899 3120 2996
1718 2067 2154 2147
2166 2356 2235 2223
1643 1666 1593 1669
552
654
676
710
361
394
436
398
135
144
150
143
95
89
125
103
43
30
30
43
21
21
20
25
17
33
14
12
8497 10353 10553 10469
15.7 14.0 13.9 14.0
2004
2005
2006
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures and
trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases in 2004
may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making inferences
based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data are partly due
to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 The figures given in this table on the length of custodial sentences relate to the longest individual sentence imposed in
a case, and do not take into account cumulative prison sentences. For cases involving multiple charges, it is often not
clear from the data used for this report exactly which sentences are cumulative and which are concurrent. This
information is necessary to allow the actual total length of sentence imposed to be calculated.
3 The sentence of corrective training was abolished on 30 June 2002 by the Sentencing Act 2002.
4 Excludes corrective training.
5 The average length of custodial sentences is calculated using all custodial sentences-including preventive detention
and life imprisonment. Although preventive detention and life imprisonment are of an indefinite length, a value of 1.5
times the minimum non-parole period imposed has been used in calculations as the approximately equivalent finite
sentence.
Between 1997 and 2003, short prison sentences (of three months or less) comprised
between 21% and 37% of all custodial sentences imposed. Between 2004 and 2006, such
sentences accounted for 29% of all prison sentences imposed each year.
Most prison sentences imposed during the decade were for periods over three months and
under 2 years (including corrective training until it was abolished in 2002). Between 1997
and 2003, the proportion of all prison sentences which fell within this range increased, from
51% to 65%. Between 2004 and 2006, such sentences accounted for an average of 58% of
all custodial sentences imposed each year.
The average custodial sentence length imposed (including life imprisonment and preventive
detention) generally increased between 1997 and 2003—from 13 and a half months in 1997
to almost 16 months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the average length was 14 months.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
111
Long determinate sentences of at least 10 years duration accounted for a small proportion of
all prison sentences imposed, representing less than 1% of all custodial sentences each year
over the decade. From 1997 to 2003, the number of long determinate prison sentences
fluctuated between 19 and 43. The figures ranged between 30 and 43 from 2004 to 2006.
The number of preventive detention and life imprisonment sentences imposed between 1997
and 2003 ranged from 28 to 47. There were 54 of these sentences imposed in 2004. This
increase was due to 33 preventive detention sentences being imposed, almost twice the
number in 2003, and nearly double the previous high of 18 recorded in 1999. The number of
preventive detention sentences imposed returned to previous levels in 2005 and 2006.
4.4
Non-parole periods imposed on indeterminate sentences
The minimum non-parole periods that could be imposed on life imprisonment sentences
before and after the Sentencing Act 2002 came into force have been discussed above in
Section 4.1. Table 4.4 shows that since 2000, minimum non-parole periods of more than 10
years have been more commonly imposed on life sentences than previously. In 2003, for the
first time in the decade, over half (11 out of 21) of the minimum non-parole periods imposed
on life imprisonment sentences exceeded the statutory minimum of 10 years. In 2006, 68%
of non-parole periods were longer than the statutory minimum. The average non-parole
period imposed in 2006 was 14 years—more than three years longer than the average length
recorded prior to the commencement of the Sentencing Act 2002.
Table 4.4
Lengths of non-parole periods imposed for life imprisonment sentences,
1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Non-parole period
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
10 years
>10 to 12 years
>12 to 14 years
>14 to 16 years
>16 to 18 years
>18 to 20 years
>20 years
Total
Overall average (years)
31
0
3
1
2
0
0
37
10.8
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
24
10.0
20
0
2
0
1
0
0
23
10.5
21
0
5
2
1
0
0
29
11.2
14
1
4
0
0
0
0
19
10.8
16
1
4
2
4
0
0
27
12.0
10
1
5
1
2
0
2
21
13.5
8
2
1
1
4
0
2
21
14.5
6
3
2
1
7
0
0
20
13.8
6
3
3
4
7
0
0
25
14.3
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The minimum non-parole period that could be imposed on preventive detention sentences
before and after the introduction of the Sentencing Act 2002 were discussed in Section 4.1.
Table 4.5 shows changes in the lengths of the minimum non-parole periods imposed on
preventive detention sentences since the Act came into force. Prior to 2002, almost all
minimum non-parole period imposed on preventive detention sentences were for the
statutory minimum of 10 years. However, from 2003 onwards the majority were for less than
10 years (92%), and the average minimum non-parole length was 6.7 years.
112
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 4.5
Lengths of non-parole periods imposed for preventive detention
sentences, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Non-parole period
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
5 years
>5 to 7 years
>7 to <10 years
10 years
>10 to 12 years
>12 to 14 years
>14 to 16 years
>16 to 18 years
>18 to 20 years
>20 years
Total
Overall average (years)
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
10.0
7
1
0
0
0
0
1
9
11.6
17
1
0
0
0
0
0
18
10.1
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
10.0
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
9
10.0
0
1
2
6
1
0
0
0
0
0
10
9.4
4
5
6
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
17
7.2
19
6
2
4
1
1
0
0
0
0
33
6.5
4
4
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
14
7.4
5
3
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
6.7
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
As noted in Section 4.1, the Sentencing Act 2002 expanded the range of offences which
qualified for preventive detention, especially violent offences. Prior to 2004, preventive
detention sentences were typically only imposed for sexual offending. Indeed, in the decade
up to 2003 only three preventive detention sentences did not involve sexual offending. In
2006, one of the twelve preventive detention sentences imposed involved only non-sexual
offending; this case involved grievous assault. Prior to the enactment of the Sentencing Act
2002, offenders could not be sentenced to preventive detention for grievous assault.
4.5
Prisoner numbers
Aside from sentencing practices in the courts, the population size of sentenced prisoners is
affected by legislation on parole eligibility and statutory release, and the decisions made by
the New Zealand Parole Board within the available statutory framework. The Parole Act
2002, which commenced on 30 June 2002, made a number of important changes with regard
to parole.
Under the Criminal Justice Act 1985, persons sentenced to one year’s imprisonment or less
were released at the expiry of half of the court-imposed sentence. Other determinate
sentences, unless imposed for a ‘serious violent offence’, had parole eligibility at one-third of
the court-imposed sentence, and a mandatory release at two-thirds. A District Prisons Board
or the Parole Board made the decision on whether to release an offender on parole. Serious
violent offenders (i.e. people sentenced to imprisonment for more than two years for a
specified serious violent offence) were not eligible for parole, and were released at two-thirds
of the court-imposed sentence.
Under the Parole Act 2002, people sentenced to imprisonment for two years or less are
released after serving half the court-imposed sentence. For determinate sentences of more
than two years, offenders are eligible for parole after serving one-third of the sentence,
unless the court imposes a longer non-parole period. Offenders who are eligible for parole
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
113
can, however, be detained until the expiry of their entire sentence. The New Zealand Parole
Board determines if and when these prisoners will be released.
The impact of the Parole Act 2002 on the prison population has probably not yet been fully
realised, as it will take some time to see the full effects of the changes on longer sentences
and the abolition of automatic release at two-thirds of the court-imposed sentence.
Table 4.6
Sentenced
prisoners2
Remand
prisoners
Annual average number of prisoners, 1997 to 20061
Male
Female
Total
Male
Female
Total
Total prisoners3
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
4400
187
4587
546
19
565
5152
4571
206
4776
647
26
673
5450
4746
201
4946
684
31
715
5661
4716
237
4953
734
33
767
5720
4748
242
4990
859
38
897
5887
4600
202
4802
892
44
936
5738
4722
250
4972
1031
56
1087
6059
4978
304
5282
1166
62
1228
6556
5369
329
5698
1186
71
1256
7100
5700
350
6050
1416
79
1495
7595
Notes:
1 Annual average prison population figures are supplied by the Department of Corrections, not sourced from LES or
CMS data. The figures include all offenders in prison, including people who had a suspended prison sentence
activated.
2 Sentenced prisoner figures do not include people serving their sentence by way of home detention.
3 The 'Total prisoners' does not always equate to the sum of 'sentenced total' and 'remand total'. This is due to
prisoners held in court and police cells.
Table 4.6 shows that the average prison population in New Zealand increased over the
decade. In 2006, the total prison population in New Zealand averaged 7,595, representing a
7% increase from 2005. In 2006, sentenced prisoners made up 80% of the average prison
population, while remand prisoners accounted for the remaining 20%. These figures do not
include people serving their prison sentence by way of home detention.
Over the decade, the majority of prisoners were male, although there was a small decline in
the proportion of male prisoners from 96% in 1997 to 94% in 2006.
Figure 4.1
Annual average number of sentenced prisoners, by gender, 1997 to 2006
6000
Males
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year
114
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Figure 4.1 shows the annual average sentenced prisoner numbers for males and females.
The annual average number of male sentenced prisoners increased by 32% over the decade,
rising from 4,400 in 1997 to 5,700 in 2006. The number of female sentenced prisoners
increased by 87% between 1997 and 2006, growing from 187 to 350.
Figure 4.2 shows the annual average remand prisoner numbers. The total number of
prisoners in custody on remand more than doubled over the decade, increasing by 165%.
The annual average number of males remanded in custody in 2006 was 159% greater than
the number in 1997, increasing from 546 to 1,416. The annual average number of women
remanded in custody quadrupled during the decade, rising from 19 in 1997 to 79 in 2006.
Figure 4.2 Annual average number of remand prisoners, 1997 to 2006
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Year
4.6
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders sent to prison in 2006
This section of the report presents information about offenders in all cases resulting in a
custodial sentence in 2006.
Table 4.7 presents information on the gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders in all cases
resulting in a custodial sentence in 2006.
Most of the cases resulting in a prison sentence in 2006 involved a male offender (90%).
Ethnicity information was available for 96% of male offenders receiving a custodial sentence.
Where ethnicity was known, just over half were Mäori, 37% were NZ European, 8% were
Pacific peoples, and 3% were recorded as ‘Other’. Forty-one per cent of the Pacific males
sent to prison in 2006 were aged under 25 years. The equivalent proportions for Mäori and
NZ European males were 38% and 35% respectively.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
115
Table 4.7
Gender & age
Male
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Female
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Total2
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Gender, age, and ethnicity of offenders in all cases resulting in a
custodial sentence, 20061,2
NZ
European
Mäori
Pacific
peoples
Other
Unknown
Total
4
400
759
517
827
840
0
3347
17
624
1178
881
1305
741
1
4747
4
116
164
136
171
98
2
691
0
14
61
55
64
36
0
230
2
52
70
47
73
126
27
397
27
1206
2232
1636
2440
1841
30
9412
0
13
64
44
95
76
0
292
2
59
126
108
145
106
0
546
1
4
9
4
11
3
0
32
0
1
5
7
7
4
0
24
0
2
19
22
47
52
4
146
3
79
223
185
305
241
4
1040
4
413
823
561
922
916
0
3639
19
683
1304
989
1450
847
1
5293
5
120
173
140
182
101
2
723
0
15
66
62
71
40
0
254
2
54
89
69
120
178
31
543
30
1285
2455
1821
2745
2082
34
10452
Notes:
1 Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data quality.
2 Numbers exclude cases where the gender of the offender was not available.
Only 10% of all cases resulting in a custodial sentence in 2006 involved a female offender.
Data on ethnicity was available for 86% of female offenders receiving custodial sentences.
Where ethnicity was known, 61% of women sent to prison were Mäori, 33% were NZ
European, 4% were Pacific peoples, and 3% were identified as ‘Other’. As was the case for
male prisoners, a larger proportion of Pacific females sent to prison were under the age of 25
compared to NZ European and Mäori females, with over 44% of the Pacific females sent to
prison in 2006 aged under 25, compared with 34% Mäori females and 26% NZ European
females.
More detailed information on the demographic, social, and criminal history characteristics of
prisoners (both sentenced and remand) in New Zealand is available from the Department of
Corrections (2004) Census of Prison Inmates and Home Detainees 2003.
116
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table A3 in Appendix A presents information on the ethnicity of offenders in all cases
resulting in a custodial sentence in 2005. 24
4.7
Custodial remands
This section of the report presents information on custodial remands. Please note that data
sourced from CMS is available for 2004 onwards. For this reason only results for the period
2004 to 2006 are presented in this section.
Table 4.8 shows all cases finalised during 2006 involving an offender who was remanded in
custody at some stage during the hearing of the case. Cases completed in one day have
been excluded from the figures shown, as custodial remands are not generally relevant to
these cases.
Table 4.8
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2006
Offence type
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
No. of cases
Custodial
involving a remand cases
custodial
as a % of all
1
cases
remand
4499
255
5087
1089
1888
623
1449
297
15187
23.6
10.1
19.2
17.2
13.6
6.0
4.0
4.6
12.5
No. of
custodial
remand
cases
convicted
2842
162
3622
668
1472
407
1248
202
10623
No. of
convicted
custodial
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
2081
102
2415
490
595
134
790
126
6733
% of convicted
custodial
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
46.3
40.0
47.5
45.0
31.5
21.5
54.5
42.4
44.3
Note:
1 Percentage calculated from all cases of duration of more than one day.
Thirteen per cent of all cases finalised in 2006 involved offenders who were remanded in
custody at some stage during the hearing of the case. Cases involving a violent offence
were the most likely to involve a custodial remand, while cases involving offences against
good order, traffic offences, or miscellaneous offences were the least likely to include a
custodial remand.
In 2006, 44% of the cases involving a custodial remand resulted in a custodial sentence
being imposed, while 30% did not result in a conviction, and 26% received non-custodial
sentences. Cases involving offenders remanded in custody as a result of a traffic offence
24
Problems with the electronic transfer of 2005 ethnicity data were identified last year where a larger
proportion of defendants had unknown ethnicity in their records than in previous years. While the
problems were under investigation, the 2004 ethnicity data were presented in the 2005 report titled
‘Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1996–2005’.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
117
were most likely to result in a custodial sentence, while cases involving offenders remanded
in custody as the result of an offence against good order were the least likely to result in a
custodial sentence. Of the 3,890 cases involving a custodial remand resulting in a conviction
and a non-custodial sentence, 45% resulted in a community-based sentence.
It should be noted, however, that the length of time spent on remand may in some cases be a
factor in the type of sentences ultimately imposed upon conviction. For example, where an
offender has spent approximately the same time on remand as they would be sentenced to
serve, it is sometimes considered more beneficial to impose a supervision sentence to aid
the offender’s reintegration into the community rather than return the offender to prison.
Tables A4 and A5 in Appendix A present information on all cases finalised during 2004 and
2005 involving an offender who was remanded in custody at some stage during the hearing
of the case.
Table 4.9 shows the estimated amount of time defendants spent in custodial remand each
year between 2004 and 2006.
The total number of cases that involved a period of custodial remand was higher in 2006 than
in 2004 and 2005. Between 2004 and 2006, 53% to 56% of the defendants placed on
25
custodial remand spent less than one month in custody as a remand prisoner each year. In
2006, 1% of remand prisoners spent more than one year on custodial remand, compared to
0.5% in 2004. The average amount of time spent in custodial remand increased from 47
days in 2004 to 52 days in 2006.
Table 4.9
Total number of cases involving a period of remand in custody of
various lengths, and average custodial remand period per case (in
days), 2004 to 2006
Time in custodial remand
2004
2005
2006
<=7 days
>7 to 14 days
>14 to 30 days
>1 to 2 months
>2 to 6 months
>6 to 12 months
>1 year
Unknown
Total
Overall average time
3751
1649
2485
2747
2807
568
68
293
14368
46.6
3948
1531
2555
2823
2815
586
129
366
14753
48.5
3983
1492
2404
2926
3112
683
146
441
15187
51.5
Many cases involve a mixture of custodial remand and bail (or remand at large), rather than
remand in custody throughout the whole pre-trial and pre-sentence period. Table 4.10
summarises, for cases that involved a remand in custody between 2004 and 2006, the
proportion of each defendant’s entire case that was spent on custodial remand for each year.
25
118
Remand includes any time spent in custody between the charge date and the sentencing date.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Excluding cases where the length of time spent on remand was unknown, 27% of defendants
placed on custodial remand in 2004 spent their whole case remanded in custody. The
proportion increased to 30% in 2006.
Between 2004 and 2006, nearly half of those placed on custodial remand spent one quarter
or less of their case remanded in custody.
In 2006, 32% of defendants spent time on custodial remand during the first quarter of their
case (for example, while information relevant to the bail decision was being collected), while
a further 36% of defendants were placed on custodial remand for the last quarter of their
case (for example, while awaiting the sentencing hearing).
Table 4.10 Total number of cases of duration of more than one day involving a
period of remand in custody of various percentage of entire case spent
in custodial remand, 2004 to 2006
Percentage of case spent in custodial
remand
0-25%
26-50%
51-75%
76-99%
All of case
Unknown
Total
4.8
2004
2005
2006
6649
1740
1100
790
3788
259
14326
6490
1716
1105
888
4176
330
14705
6523
1797
1126
887
4402
408
15143
Summary of key findings
The key findings from this chapter are as follows:
•
Over the decade, around half of the convicted cases resulting in a custodial sentence
involved either traffic or property offences.
•
In 2006, 30% of cases resulting in a custodial sentence involved property offences, while
26% involved violent offences, and 20% involved traffic offences.
•
The average sentence length (including life imprisonment and preventive detention
sentences) increased from 13 and a half months in 1997 to almost 16 months in 2003.
Between 2004 and 2006, the average length has been relatively stable at 14 months.
•
The Sentencing Act 2002 altered legislation regarding minimum non-parole periods
imposed on life imprisonment and preventive detention sentences. As a result, the
average minimum non-parole period for life imprisonment increased, while the average
minimum non-parole period for preventive detention sentences decreased during the
decade.
•
The annual average prison population rose by 47% over the decade. In 2006 the total
average prison population was 7,595, representing a 7% increase from 2005.
•
Remand prisoners comprised an increasing proportion of the average annual prison
population over the decade, with the number of remand prisoners more than doubling
between 1997 and 2006.
•
The overwhelming majority of those sent to prison over the decade were male.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
119
120
•
Of the 9,412 cases involving male offenders that resulted in a custodial sentence in 2006,
where ethnicity was known, 53% involved Mäori, 37% involved NZ European, 8%
involved Pacific peoples, and 2% involved offenders belonging to other ethnic groups.
•
Of the 1,040 cases involving female offenders that received a custodial sentence in 2006,
where ethnicity was known, 61% involved Mäori offenders, 33% involved NZ European
offenders, 4% involved Pacific peoples, and 3% involved offenders belonging to other
ethnic groups.
•
Thirteen per cent of all the cases finalised in 2006 involved offenders who were
remanded in custody at some stage during the hearing of their case.
•
In 2006, 44% of the cases involving a custodial remand subsequently resulted in a
custodial sentence, while 30% were not convicted, and 26% resulted in a non-custodial
sentence being imposed.
•
The overall average amount of time spent on custodial remand increased from 47 days in
2004 to 52 days in 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
5
Community-based sentences
5.1
Introduction
This chapter discusses the use of community-based sentences between 1997 and 2006,
expanding some of the information presented in Chapter 3.
The first part of this chapter provides a brief overview of the key types of community-based
sentences available during the period and reiterates key legislative changes that have
impacted on the application and duration of community-based sentences during this time.
The second part of this chapter examines the total number and proportion of convicted cases
resulting in the imposition of work-related community sentences for each offence category. It
also includes data on the length of work-related community sentences during the decade.
The third part of this chapter explores the use of supervision sentences. It presents data on
the total number and proportion of convicted cases resulting in supervision as the most
serious sentence for each offence category. It also examines the lengths of supervision
sentences imposed between 1997 and 2006, as well as the number of supervision sentences
imposed in conjunction with periodic detention (prior to 2002) and community work sentences
(from 2002 onwards).
The final part of this chapter provides a brief summary of key findings.
Before information about community sentences can be discussed, however, it is first
necessary to clarify the nature of the data used in this chapter. The information presented in
this chapter is case-based. As outlined in Chapter 1, the system used to log cases was
updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This may cause changes in the figures and trends that
are observed prior to 2003 and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution
should be taken when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004.
Since the commencement of the Sentencing Act 2002 on 30 June 2002, there have been
only two community-based sentences available in New Zealand—community work and
26
supervision. Previously there were four community-based sentences available: periodic
detention, community service, community programme, and supervision. Community work
replaced periodic detention and community service, while supervision was modified to
include the care aspect of the community programme sentence (see Section 3.2 for a
detailed discussion of the changes introduced by the Sentencing Act 2002). To simplify trend
analysis, the data on periodic detention and community service sentences prior to 2002, and
26
From 1 October 2007, two new community-based sentences, intensive supervision and community
detention, became available. These sentences were not operative in the time period covered by this
report, and, consequently, are not discussed in this chapter.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
121
community-work sentences from 2002 onwards, has at times been grouped together in this
chapter as ‘work-related community sentences’.
Community work is a sentence aimed at compensating the community, and can be imposed
for not less than 40 hours and not more than 400 hours. The offender must report to a
probation officer who will determine the appropriate placement of the offender, i.e. at a
27
community work centre, with another agency, or a combination of both of these.
Supervision is a rehabilitative sentence for those offenders who are at risk of reoffending, and
for whom supervision and monitoring would be likely to reduce that risk. Supervision can be
28
imposed for a period of between six months and two years. The offender is under the
supervision of a probation officer and must report to the probation officer, as and when
required to do so. All offenders sentenced to supervision are subject to standard conditions
(e.g. restrictions relating to the offender’s work, residence, and associates) and to any special
conditions imposed by the court (e.g. those relating to programmes).
Periodic detention involved an offender reporting to a work centre for at least one day a week
for up to 10 hours. A periodic detention warden supervised the offender in unpaid work.
Periodic detention could be imposed for a period not exceeding 12 months.
Community service involved an offender doing between 20 and 200 hours unpaid work for a
community group. A sponsor from the community group supervised the offender.
Community programme involved an offender being placed in the care of an appropriate group
or individual, and participating in a programme for a period not exceeding 12 months.
Community work and supervision can be imposed concurrently with each other. Prior to the
Sentencing Act 2002 coming into force, only periodic detention and supervision could be
imposed concurrently. This chapter includes information on sentences resulting in
supervision in conjunction with periodic detention (prior to 2002) or community work (post
2002).
Community work and supervision sentences cannot be imposed cumulatively on a sentence
of imprisonment, although previously (from 1993 to 2002) any community-based sentence
29
could be imposed cumulatively on a prison sentence of one year or less. Information on
cases that received custodial sentences in conjunction with community-based sentences is
not included in this report.
27
28
29
122
The work taken is unpaid.
From 1 October 2007, the maximum term of sentence of supervision became 12 months. Because this
change occurred outside the time period of this report it does not impact on trends described in this
chapter.
While supervision can no longer be imposed cumulatively on a sentence of imprisonment, under Section
93 of the Sentencing Act 2002 the court can impose standard and/or special conditions on release of an
offender sentenced to imprisonment for two years or less.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
5.2
Work-related community sentences
Table 5.1 shows that the total number of work-related community sentences imposed
generally tracked downwards between 1998 and 2002. Between 1997 and 1998, the number
of cases resulting in a work-related community sentence increased by 9%, from 27,322 to
29,865, before declining by 15% to 25,519 in 2000. Between 2001 and 2003, the figures
remained constant at an average of 25,000, and remained at this level until 2006, when the
number rose by 9% to reach 27,196.
Table 5.1
Total number of cases resulting in work-related community sentences
as the most serious sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
1997
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
3210 3372 3285 3146 3037 3132 3350 3275 3653 3717
335
373
356
273
309
328
348
331
358
392
7632 8095 8330 7590 7603 7633 7648 7383 6890 7365
2034 2591 2246 2036 1816 1747 1734 1574 1434 1380
2451 2774 2931 3010 2971 2975 2534 2778 2900 3320
722
778
900
741
800
740
907
848
895 1037
10681 11537 10352 8474 8434 7701 8164 8263 8519 9563
257
345
307
249
255
301
388
387
349
422
27322 29865 28707 25519 25225 24557 25073 24839 24998 27196
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, extreme caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 5.2 shows the percentage of cases resulting in a work-related community sentence as
the most serious sentence.
Table 5.2
Percentage of cases resulting in work-related community sentences as
the most serious sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
1997
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
11.7 11.3 11.4 12.3 12.0 12.8 13.4 13.2 14.6 13.7
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.4
27.9 27.1 29.0 29.7 30.1 31.1 30.5 29.7 27.6 27.1
7.4
8.7
7.8
8.0
7.2
7.1
6.9
6.3
5.7
5.1
9.0
9.3 10.2 11.8 11.8 12.1 10.1 11.2 11.6 12.2
2.6
2.6
3.1
2.9
3.2
3.0
3.6
3.4
3.6
3.8
39.1 38.6 36.1 33.2 33.4 31.4 32.6 33.3 34.1 35.2
0.9
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.5
1.6
1.4
1.6
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, extreme caution should be
used when making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other
changes in the above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full
details.
Cases involving traffic offences and property offences accounted for the majority of workrelated community sentences across the decade, accounting for 35% and 29% respectively
of cases receiving these sentences each year. Between 1998 and 2002, the number of
traffic cases that resulted in work-related community sentences declined by 33% (from
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
123
11,537 to 7,701), before increasing 6% between 2002 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006,
the number increased by 16%, from 8,263 to 9,563. The number of property cases receiving
work-related community sentences peaked at 8,330 in 1999, before dropping to 7,590 in
2000, then increased slightly to reach 7,648 in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number
fluctuated at an average of approximately 7,200 per annum.
Cases involving violent offences accounted for an average of 12% of all cases resulting in
work-related community sentences each year between 1997 and 2003. In the period from
2004 to 2006, violent cases represented 14% of all cases receiving work-related community
sentences. The number of cases involving violent offences that resulted in work-related
community sentences declined between 1998 and 2001, before increasing by 10% to reach
3,350 in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number increased by 23%, from 3,275 to 3,717.
Cases involving offences against the administration of justice represented an average of 11%
of cases resulting in a work-related community sentence each year between 1997 and 2003.
The number of these cases receiving work-related community sentences increased by 23%
between 1997 and 2000 (from 2,451 to 3,010) and remained at this level in 2001 and 2002.
Between 2004 and 2006, the number of cases involving offences against justice that received
work-related community sentences rose by 20%, from 2,778 to 3,320.
The number of drug offences cases resulting in a work-related community sentence generally
declined from 1998 onwards, dropping by 33% between 1998 and 2003, from 2,591 to 1,734.
Between 2004 and 2006, the number decreased by 12%, from 1,574 to 1,380.
Cases that involved offences against good order, other offences against the person, and
miscellaneous offences made up only a small proportion of all cases receiving a work-related
community sentence over the decade, respectively accounting for an average of 3%, 1%,
and 1% of such sentences each year.
Table 5.3 shows that the average length of work-related community sentences imposed in
2006 was 116 hours, representing a 6% decline from the average length of 123 hours in
2004.
From 1997 to 2003, the proportion of work-related community sentences of 100 hours or less
was between 49% and 55%. In 2006, 60% of work-related sentences were for periods of 100
hours or less. This represented a small increase compared to 2004 and 2005, where 55%
and 58% of work-related community sentences were for this duration.
Less than 1% of work-related community sentences exceeded 300 hours between 1997 and
2001. The proportion fluctuated between 1% and 2% from 2002 to 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, the proportion dropped from 2% to 1%. The number of work-related community
sentences of more than 300 hours declined by 12% from 432 in 2004 to 383 in 2006.
124
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 5.3
Number of work-related community sentences imposed of various
lengths, and average length of work-related community sentences (in
hours), 1997 to 20061,2
LES
Sentence length
3
<=50 hours
>50 to 100 hours
>100 to 150 hours
>150 to 200 hours
>200 to 250 hours
>250 to 300 hours
>300 to 350 hours
>350 to 400 hours
Total
Overall average
1997
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
3490 4238 4153 3697 3615 3908 5040 5055 5351 6120
9769 11076 10214 9259 9020 8531 8652 8711 9251 10190
5498 5884 5693 5239 4890 4704 4386 4484 4385 4520
6733 6967 6962 6142 6381 5140 4108 3877 3598 3778
704
673
642
516
557 1034 1390 1316 1259 1326
1020
945
952
634
722
941 1038
964
808
879
58
61
64
21
26
163
223
224
194
223
50
21
27
11
14
136
236
208
152
160
27322 29865 28707 25519 25225 24557 25073 24839 24998 27196
126
122
123
121
123
127
125
123
118
116
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 Only work-related community sentences imposed as the most serious sentence are included in this table.
3 Periodic detention was imposed by the courts in day, week or month units up to a maximum term of 12 months. For
the purpose of this table, periodic detention sentence lengths were converted to sentences in hours based on the
assumption that a periodic detention sentence of 12 months was equivalent to a community work sentence of 400
hours. That is, a conversion factor of 400/12 was applied to the number of months of periodic detention imposed.
For example, a nine-month sentence of periodic detention was assumed to be equivalent to 300 hours [9*400/12] of
community work.
5.3
Supervision
Table 5.4 shows that the number of supervision sentences imposed as the principal sentence
decreased between 1997 and 2003. This downward trend started before the commencement
of the Sentencing Act 2002, but accelerated slightly in 2003 after the Act came into effect.
The figures rose by 11% between 2004 and 2006, from 2,014 to 2,243. The number of
supervision sentences imposed generally decreased over the decade for all offence types,
with the exception of offences against justice.
Table 5.5 shows that throughout the decade, cases involving violent offences accounted for a
greater proportion of supervision cases than other types of offences. From 1997 to 2003, the
proportion was between 35% and 38%. In 2006, 39% of supervision cases involved violent
offences.
The number of supervision sentences imposed for property offences declined by 64%
between 1997 and 2006. From 1997 to 2003, an average of 27% of supervision sentences
involved property offences. In 2006, 22% of cases receiving supervision sentences were
cases involving property offences.
On average, 17% of supervision sentences imposed between 1997 and 2003 involved traffic
offences. Between 2004 and 2006, 14% to 15% of supervision orders related to cases
involving traffic offences.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
125
Table 5.4
Total number of cases resulting in supervision as the most serious
sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
1829
113
1380
283
247
158
982
45
5037
1770
116
1386
297
280
159
961
35
5004
1663
106
1200
255
316
181
779
50
4550
1388
103
1125
233
271
169
698
37
4024
1184
106
891
190
213
142
611
30
3367
878
64
608
104
188
107
347
16
2312
689
61
494
69
182
85
298
16
1894
699
49
541
103
210
100
302
10
2014
975
72
511
90
249
102
328
20
2347
872
72
502
97
249
108
312
31
2243
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 5.5
Percentage of cases resulting in supervision as the most serious
sentence, by type of offence, 1997 to 2006
LES
Offence type
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
Note:
1997
1998
1999
2000
CMS
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
36.3 35.4 36.5 34.5 35.2 38.0 36.4 34.7 41.5 38.9
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.6
3.1
2.8
3.2
2.4
3.1
3.2
27.4 27.7 26.4 28.0 26.5 26.3 26.1 26.9 21.8 22.4
5.6
5.9
5.6
5.8
5.6
4.5
3.6
5.1
3.8
4.3
4.9
5.6
6.9
6.7
6.3
8.1
9.6 10.4 10.6 11.1
3.1
3.2
4.0
4.2
4.2
4.6
4.5
5.0
4.3
4.8
19.5 19.2 17.1 17.3 18.1 15.0 15.7 15.0 14.0 13.9
0.9
0.7
1.1
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.9
1.4
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
Table 5.6 shows the average length (in months) of supervision sentences. Supervision
sentences must be for a term of between six months and two years. From 1997 to 2003, 6%
to 9% of supervision sentences were for terms of more than one year. Between 2004 and
2006, 7% and 8% were for periods over one year.
The length of supervision sentences averaged around 10 months each year between 1997
and 2006.
126
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 5.6
Number of supervision sentences imposed of various lengths, and
average length of supervision sentences (in months), 1997 to 20061,2
LES
CMS
Sentence length
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
<=6 months
>6 to 9 months
>9 to 12 months
>12 to 18 months
>18 to 24 months
Total
Overall average
1727
1488
1488
195
139
5037
9.7
1693
1492
1524
207
88
5004
9.6
1571
1392
1331
170
86
4550
9.5
1147
1340
1263
178
96
4024
9.9
991
1147
991
144
94
3367
9.9
633
727
746
123
83
2312
10.2
415
713
629
86
51
1894
10.2
445
700
712
100
57
2014
10.3
502
897
796
98
54
2347
10.1
494
864
722
102
61
2243
10.2
Notes:
1 The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of cases
in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when making
inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the above data
are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
2 Only supervision sentences imposed as the most serious sentence are included in this table.
Table 5.7 shows that in 2006 there were 3,248 cases that resulted in a supervision sentence
concurrent with community work. These cases are included in the figures of community work
as the most serious sentence in Table 3.1, as community work has a higher ranking
seriousness score than supervision (see Section 2.4 for more detailed about how
seriousness scores are calculated for non-custodial sentences).
Table 5.7
Total number of cases resulting in a supervision sentence in conjunction
with periodic detention or community work, by type of offence, 1997 to
2006
LES
CMS
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
1098
47
860
212
129
45
864
12
3267
1106
39
845
309
157
47
931
24
3458
1026
36
796
267
163
57
892
21
3258
963
37
744
243
137
45
841
18
3028
812
33
639
187
118
43
779
18
2629
728
40
636
166
114
40
681
13
2418
880
34
681
159
97
40
722
17
2630
833
35
586
137
101
49
796
26
2563
1036
40
631
111
107
49
886
23
2883
1113
38
704
126
103
68
1069
27
3248
Note:
The system used to log cases was updated in 2004 (from LES to CMS). This has caused changes in the figures
and trends in cases that are observed up to and following 2004. In particular, any changes in the number of
cases in 2004 may not represent a true change in offender patterns. Accordingly, caution should be used when
making inferences based on any change between 2003 and 2004. Please also note that other changes in the
above data are partly due to, for example, finalised appeals. See Sections 1.2 to 1.4 for full details.
The number of cases resulting in supervision concurrent with periodic detention or
community work increased slightly between 1997 and 1998, and then decreased by 30%
between 1998 and 2002, dropping from 3,458 to 2,418. Between 2004 and 2006, the
number increased by 27%, from 2,563 to 3,248.
Table 5.7 shows that the majority of cases resulting in supervision sentences in conjunction
with periodic detention or community work involved violent offences, traffic offences, and
property offences. In 2006, 89% of cases resulting in supervision concurrent with community
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
127
work involved either violent, traffic, or property offences. These cases accounted for 34%,
33% and 22% respectively of all cases resulting in concurrent supervision sentences in 2006.
The average length of supervision sentences imposed from 1997 to 2003 was almost 10
months. Between 2004 and 2006, the average length was just over 10 months.
As noted earlier, supervision can no longer be imposed cumulatively on a sentence of
imprisonment. However, under section 93 of the Sentencing Act 2002, the court can impose
standard and/or special conditions on release of an offender sentenced to imprisonment for
two years or less.
5.4
Summary of key findings
The key findings of this chapter are as follows:
128
•
Between 1997 and 1998, the number of cases resulting in a work-related community
sentence increased by 9%, from 27,322 to 29,865, before declining by 15% to reach
25,519 in 2000. The number remained at this level until 2006, when it increased by 9%
to 27,196.
•
Work-related community sentences were most frequently imposed for traffic, property,
and violent offences during the decade. In 2006, 35% of cases resulting in a workrelated community sentences involved traffic offences, 27% involved property offences,
and 14% related to violent offences.
•
Between 2004 and 2006, the average length of community sentences imposed
decreased from 123 hours to 116 hours.
•
The number of supervision sentences imposed as the principal sentence decreased
between 1997 and 2003. However, between 2004 and 2006 the number rose by 11%
from 2,014 to 2,243.
•
Over the decade, the number of cases resulting in supervision sentences decreased
across all offence types, with the exception of offences against justice.
•
During the decade, a greater proportion of cases receiving supervision sentences
involved violent offences than any other offence type. In 2006, 39% of all cases resulting
in supervision sentences involved violent offences.
•
The number of property cases receiving supervision sentences declined by 64% between
1997 and 2006, from 1,380 to 502. In 2006, 22% of cases resulting in supervision
sentences involved property offences.
•
The overall average length of supervision sentences imposed during the decade was
around 10 months.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
6
Monetary penalties
6.1
Introduction
This chapter examines the use of monetary penalties (fines and reparation) between 1997
and 2006. It expands on the material contained in Chapter 3, and provides new information
about monetary-based sentences. Because an offender has to pay every fine and reparation
sentence imposed by the courts, the data presented in this chapter is charge-based.
The first part of this chapter examines the total number and proportion of convicted charges
that resulted in the imposition of a fine for each offence category during the decade. It also
presents data on the amounts of fines imposed between 1997 and 2006, and the number of
other sentences imposed concurrently with fines during this period.
The second part of this chapter explores the number and proportion of reparation sentences
imposed for different offence categories. It also includes data about the reparation amounts
imposed for each type of offence, and the number of other sentences imposed in conjunction
with reparation between 1997 and 2006.
The third part of this chapter provides more detailed information about the use of reparation
for cases involving property offences. This offence category has been selected for further
investigation because most reparation sentences imposed during the period related to
property offences. Data is presented on the number and proportion of property offences
resulting in reparation for each offence within this category. This section also provides
information about the proportionate use of reparation sentences imposed in property cases
for each court area over the decade.
The final part of this chapter provides a summary of key findings.
Before statistical information on monetary penalties is discussed, it is first necessary to
outline the key legislative changes that impacted on the provision of monetary penalties
during the decade and provide some contextual information about the legal restrictions
surrounding the imposition of fines and reparation sentences.
Following the introduction of the Sentencing Act in 2002, greater emphasis has been placed
on the use of fines and reparation. The Act created a presumption in favour of the use of
fines, where a fine would constitute sufficient punishment for the offence and it is within the
means of the offender to pay (section 13).
Fines can be imposed for nearly every offence for an amount up to the maximum specified in
legislation for each type of offence. For offences punishable by imprisonment or a
community-based sentence for which no fine is prescribed, the court may impose a fine of
any amount within the limits outlined below, except where this is expressly disallowed. Under
the Criminal Justice Act 1985, the maximum fines available in cases where no maximum fine
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
129
30
was prescribed could not exceed $4,000 if imposed by a District Court judge, and could not
exceed $400 if imposed by a Justice of the Peace or Community Magistrate. There was no
limit on the amount of fines that could be imposed in the High Court. The Sentencing Act
2002 increased the maximum fine able to be imposed by a District Court judge, where no
maximum is specified to $10,000. The maximum limit available to Justices of the Peace,
Community Magistrates, and High Court judges remained unchanged.
In terms of reparation, the Criminal Justice Act 1985 provided that: ‘The court shall consider
imposing a sentence of reparation in every case, and, subject to section 22 of this Act, shall
impose such a sentence unless it is satisfied that it would be clearly inappropriate to do so’.
Section 28 of the Act also specified that all or part of a fine could be paid as compensation to
victims of offences involving physical or emotional harm, provided the offence was
31
unprovoked. This provision was not retained by the Sentencing Act 2002. Instead, the
sentence of reparation was extended to cover similar circumstances (see section 32).
The Sentencing Act 2002 introduced a stronger presumption in favour of reparation. In
particular, section 12 of the Act strengthened the onus on courts to impose reparation,
instructing that, ‘if a court is lawfully entitled … to impose a sentence of reparation, it must
impose it unless it is satisfied that the sentence would result in undue hardship for the
offender or the dependants of the offender, or that other special circumstances would make it
inappropriate’. The Act also extended the sentence of reparation to victims of the offence
who had suffered loss or damage consequential on any emotional or physical harm, or loss
of, or damage to, property (see section 32). The court must not, however, order reparation in
relation to any consequential loss or damage where the court believes that the victim has
entitlements under the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Act 2001. In
addition, under the Sentencing Act, if a court considers that it would otherwise be appropriate
to impose a sentence of reparation and a sentence of a fine, but it appears to the court that
the offender does not have the means to pay both, the court must sentence the offender to
make reparation.
Prior to the commencement of the Sentencing Act 2002, both fines and reparation sentences
could be imposed either alone, or in combination with other sentences. The Sentencing Act
2002 introduced some limitations on combinations of sentences. A fine and imprisonment
can no longer be imposed together, unless a particular enactment expressly provides
otherwise. In addition, a fine cannot be imposed in combination with a sentence of
32
community work.
It is not possible to identify from the data used in this report whether reparation was imposed
as the result of property damage or loss, or as the result of emotional harm. It is also not
30
31
32
130
However, where a person was found guilty on indictment in a District Court, or pleaded guilty after
committal to a District Court for trial, a judge could fine up to a maximum of $10,000 where no maximum
was prescribed by statute.
Reparation sentences were examined in depth four years after they were first introduced. See Galaway
and Spier (1992) for more information on the initial use of reparation sentences.
This limitation was abolished on 1 October 2007.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
possible to detect whether reparation sentences were imposed for part or the full amount of
the victim’s financial loss. Also, neither the data from LES nor CMS provides information on
whether sentences of reparation or fines were actually paid.
6.2
Use of fines
During the decade, fines were the most frequently imposed sentence in New Zealand courts.
Tables 6.1 and 6.2 present information on convicted charges of each type of offence resulting
in a fine between 1997 and 2006.
Table 6.1 shows there was an increase in the number of convicted charges resulting in a fine
over the decade. Between 1997 and 2006, the number of charges resulting in fines
increased by 10%, from 56,276 to 62,168.
Table 6.1
Total number of convicted charges resulting in a fine, by type of offence,
1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
2731 2645 2445 2576 2627 2399 2074 2181 2056 1803
837
831
867
925
904
949 1020 1001
881
850
4531 4439 4723 4716 4824 4543 4425 4517 4133 4154
5034 4825 5103 4789 4464 4143 3916 3540 3168 3151
1199 1051 1148 1108 1202 1640 1191 1254 1002
990
4247 4074 4516 4955 5588 5909 6470 6081 5601 6320
31158 30989 30529 31282 31200 30372 30492 32057 31678 32451
6539 6074 5771 4494 5846 6552 9582 9129 9554 12449
56276 54928 55102 54845 56655 56507 59170 59760 58073 62168
Note:
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Table includes all charges resulting in a fine, either as the primary, secondary, or tertiary sentence.
In 2006, over half (52%) of the fines imposed were for traffic offences, while 20% were for
miscellaneous offences. The number of fines recorded in 2006 was the highest recorded
33
since 1996.
As noted in Section 3.3, research conducted in 2001 with District Court judges found that
some judges felt the Sentencing Act 2002 would make little difference to current practice
because they were already imposing a fine whenever possible, while others were reluctant to
see fines used more widely—mainly due to many offenders’ inability to pay fines. The
research found that half of the participating judges said they would impose alternative
sentences in most cases because offenders could not afford to pay the fines they would
usually impose (Searle 2003).
Across the decade, between 30% and 33% of all charges resulting in a conviction had a fine
imposed, as shown in Table 6.2. In 2006, nearly two-thirds of miscellaneous offence charges
and over half of traffic charges resulting in a conviction had a fine imposed.
33
Following 1996, the number of charges resulting in fines decreased by 13%. This was principally due to
the offence of failing to register a dog becoming reclassified as an infringement offence.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
131
Table 6.2
Percentage of all convicted charges resulting in a fine, by type of offence,
1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Overall
17.4
23.9
8.4
38.7
8.1
42.8
51.5
67.4
31.1
16.4
22.4
8.3
34.1
6.7
38.7
49.8
60.1
29.6
16.0
23.5
9.2
36.4
7.5
40.9
51.9
61.2
30.8
17.7
25.1
9.5
35.1
7.2
42.8
54.9
58.6
31.7
17.9
24.4
9.9
35.6
8.0
45.1
55.1
62.9
32.8
16.6
25.2
9.6
33.8
11.0
46.0
55.7
64.6
33.1
13.6
24.5
9.0
31.7
7.4
46.3
54.6
70.9
32.8
14.0
23.6
9.1
30.4
6.6
43.6
54.1
67.8
31.9
12.4
19.7
8.9
29.0
4.7
42.0
53.0
65.7
31.0
10.6
18.4
8.8
27.8
4.2
42.1
51.2
65.4
30.9
Table 6.3 presents information on the amounts of fines imposed over the decade. The courts
imposed just over $31 million in fines in 2006, compared to $25 million in 2005 (a 24%
increase). The median fine imposed between 1999 and 2006 was $300, compared to $250
in 1997 and 1998. The number of fines imposed for $100 or less declined by 30% between
1997 and 2006, dropping from 10,513 to 7,338. In contrast, fines imposed for $251 to $500
showed an upward trend over the decade, increasing by 52%. Very few fines over $1,000
were imposed during the decade. In 2006, only 3% of fines imposed exceeded $1,000.
Table 6.3
Year
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Amounts of fines imposed, 1997 to 2006
<=$100
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
10513
18.7
9252
16.8
7638
13.9
5951
10.9
6372
11.2
6138
10.9
6612
11.2
5953
10.0
5734
9.9
7338
11.8
>$100
>$250 >$500 to >$1000
Total
Median
>$5000
Total amount
to $250 to $500
$1000 to $5000
number1 amount2
19112
34.0
18822
34.3
18589
33.7
18164
33.1
18072
31.9
17482
30.9
19287
32.6
18884
31.6
18615
32.1
20104
32.3
14484
25.7
15209
27.7
17450
31.7
18962
34.6
19684
34.7
20689
36.6
21516
36.4
22765
38.1
21588
37.2
22000
35.4
10340
18.4
9998
18.2
9758
17.7
10081
18.4
10642
18.8
10659
18.9
10350
17.5
10737
18.0
10761
18.5
10820
17.4
1683
3.0
1462
2.7
1554
2.8
1571
2.9
1745
3.1
1422
2.5
1259
2.1
1303
2.2
1203
2.1
1628
2.6
144
0.3
185
0.3
113
0.2
116
0.2
140
0.2
117
0.2
146
0.2
116
0.2
169
0.3
269
0.4
56276
100.0
54928
100.0
55102
100.0
54845
100.0
56655
100.0
56507
100.0
59170
100.0
59758
100.0
58070
100.0
62159
100.0
$250
$23,068,918
$250
$22,531,583
$300
$23,711,661
$300
$23,390,149
$300
$24,811,000
$300
$24,470,894
$300
$24,644,458
$300
$25,088,188
$300
$25,016,353
$300
$31,039,188
Notes:
1 The median is the middle value when numbers are arranged from smallest to largest. In this table, the median, rather
than the mean is used as the statistical representation of the average value, because the median is not affected by a
small number of very low or very high values.
2 Table excludes a small number of charges where the amount of fine imposed was not known.
132
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Tables 6.4 and 6.5 present information on fines imposed with other sentences between 1997
and 2006.
Table 6.4
Other sentences imposed with fines, 1997 to 20061
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Periodic detention2
Community service2
Community programme2
Supervision
Reparation
Deferment
Driving disqualification
Other
Fine only3
Total
18
7
20
19
11
11
10
4
2
6
185
204
185
203
180
77
120
89
66
55
44
38
5
0
4
1
2
0
526
472
484
392
352
202
125
109
220
118
1869 1815 1909 1944 2009 2152 2723 2650 2704 2649
70
46
68
56
54
15
6
12
14
35
18704 18456 17935 17720 18431 18163 18582 20546 21404 22502
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
19
21
46
34779 33839 34431 34455 35572 35848 37724 36420 33708 36812
56276 54928 55102 54845 56655 56507 59170 59760 58073 62168
Notes:
1 If more than one other sentence was imposed in conjunction with a fine, then only the most serious of the other
sentences is shown in this table.
2 The Sentencing Act 2002 abolished the sentences of periodic detention, community service, and community
programme. The sentence of community work that replaced periodic detention and community service cannot be
imposed in combination with a fine.
3 Figures may include associated costs.
Table 6.5 shows that in 2006 a fine was the sole sentence imposed in over half (59%) of all
convicted charges resulting in fines. Fines were more likely to be imposed in conjunction
with driving disqualification orders than any other sentence, with the number of fines imposed
with driving disqualifications increasing by 20% between 1997 and 2006, from 18,704 to
22,502. For some traffic offences, such as driving with excess alcohol, a driving
disqualification is mandatory upon conviction.
Table 6.5
Percentage of fines imposed with other sentences, 1997 to 2006
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Periodic detention
Community service
Community programme
Supervision
Reparation
Deferment
Driving disqualification
Other
Fine only1
Total
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.2
3.3
3.3
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.8
4.6
4.4
4.7
4.3
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
33.2 33.6 32.5 32.3 32.5 32.1 31.4 34.4 36.9 36.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
61.8 61.6 62.5 62.8 62.8 63.4 63.8 60.9 58.0 59.2
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Note:
1 Figures may include associated costs.
Custodial and community-based sentences were rarely imposed in conjunction with fines. As
noted in Section 6.1, after the commencement of the Sentencing Act 2002 on 30 June 2002,
fines could not be imposed in combination with community work or imprisonment (unless
particular legislation allowed this combination).
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
133
From 1997 to 2002, between 3% and 4% of convicted charges resulting in a fine also
resulted in a sentence of reparation. The proportion has subsequently increased and has
ranged between 4% and 5% between 2003 and 2006.
6.3
Use of reparation for all offences
Sections 6.3 and 6.4 present information on the use of reparation over the period 1997 to
2006. As noted in Section 6.1, the Sentencing Act 2002 extended the provision for
reparation previously available under the Criminal Justice Act 1985 to include circumstances
where formerly full or part payment of a fine to the victim could be ordered by the court. This
provision has increased the number of reparation sentences imposed since 30 June 2002.
Under the Sentencing Act 2002 reparation can be imposed on an offender when a victim,
through or by means of a criminal offence, has suffered:
•
loss of, or damage to, property
•
emotional harm
•
loss or damage consequential on any emotional or physical harm or loss of, or damage
to, property.
Tables 6.6 and 6.7 show the numbers and percentage of convicted charges of each type of
offence resulting in reparation. The number of convicted charges resulting in reparation
showed a generally upward trend over the decade. The majority of charges resulting in
reparation involved property offences. In 2006, 74% of charges resulting in reparation
involved property offences.
Table 6.6
Total number of convicted charges resulting in reparation, by type of
offence, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
539
604
514
489
553
910 1527 1688 1797 1741
44
46
34
51
46
57
142
104
112
126
11147 11207 10463 9978 10505 10636 11647 11936 11754 12826
5
13
11
11
18
39
63
16
11
19
37
49
44
46
39
61
70
80
91
68
100
114
134
107
127
151
218
187
186
191
698
836
824
809
817 1144 1623 1808 2003 2104
310
324
361
167
156
191
346
286
341
317
12880 13193 12385 11658 12261 13189 15636 16105 16295 17392
Note:
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Table includes all charges resulting in reparation, either as the primary, secondary, or tertiary sentence.
Table 6.7 demonstrates that, compared to other offence types, property offences are more
likely to result in a reparation sentence. In 2006, 27% of convicted property charges resulted
in a reparation sentence, compared to 21% in 1997. The next offence type most likely to
have reparation imposed in 2006 was violence (10%). Violent offences have resulted in
reparation more frequently following the introduction of the Sentencing Act 2002—
presumably because of the extension of reparation to include ‘loss or damage consequential
on any emotional or physical harm’.
134
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 6.7
Percentage of convicted charges of each type of offence resulting in
reparation, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Overall
3.4
1.3
20.8
0.0
0.2
1.0
1.2
3.2
7.1
3.7
1.2
21.0
0.1
0.3
1.1
1.3
3.2
7.1
3.4
0.9
20.4
0.1
0.3
1.2
1.4
3.8
6.9
3.4
1.4
20.1
0.1
0.3
0.9
1.4
2.2
6.7
3.8
1.2
21.6
0.1
0.3
1.0
1.4
1.7
7.1
6.3
1.5
22.4
0.3
0.4
1.2
2.1
1.9
7.7
10.0
3.4
23.8
0.5
0.4
1.6
2.9
2.6
8.7
10.8
2.5
23.9
0.1
0.4
1.3
3.0
2.1
8.6
10.8
2.5
25.3
0.1
0.4
1.4
3.3
2.3
8.7
10.2
2.7
27.1
0.2
0.3
1.3
3.3
1.7
8.6
One explanation for the limited use of reparation is that a large number of charges do not
result in financial loss to the victim, or do not have an identifiable victim (e.g. charges
involving drug offences). Thus, as Galaway and Spier (1992) found in their research on
reparation, around 41% of property offences and 96% of offences against the person (i.e.
either violent offences or other offences against the person) resulting in a conviction involved
no financial loss to the victim. Consequently, no reparation for property damage or loss could
be imposed in these cases (although reparation could still be imposed for emotional harm
suffered through or by means of the offence). Research carried out by the Ministry of Justice
demonstrated that the main reasons cited by judges for not imposing reparation were:
•
that the loss had been made good or the property was recovered
•
there was no victim loss
•
or there was only minimal loss (see Spier 1997).
Information on whether there was a financial loss to the victim was not available in the data
used for this report, preventing this type of analysis from being repeated in the current report.
For six specific types of non-property offences, a greater proportion of convicted charges
resulted in reparation than for the major non-property offence categories shown in Table 6.7.
Further analysis has revealed that 18% of robbery offences, 11% of grievous assaults, 17%
of serious assaults, 12% of other offences against the person (mostly endangering, or health
and safety offences), 42% of driving causing death or injury offences, and 27% of offences
against the Dog Control Act 1996 (mostly dogs attacking stock or people) resulted in
reparation in 2006.
Table 6.8 shows the number of reparation sentences of different amounts imposed in the
decade. The total amount of reparation imposed in 2006 was $23.1 million, compared to
$11.8 million in 1997 (a 96% increase). The proportion of reparation sentences involving
amounts of $250 or less decreased over the decade (from 55% to 45%). This was reflected
in the median reparation sentence imposed, which increased from $218 in 1997 to $300 in
2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
135
There is a wide variation in the amounts of individual reparation sentences. The smallest
amount of reparation imposed in 2006 was 60 cents and the largest amount imposed was
$335,795. Larger reparation sentences are usually imposed on companies in relation to
Occupational Safety and Health Service prosecutions for work-place accidents. Property
offences accounted for 65% of the total amount of financial reparation imposed in 2006
($15.1 million of the total $23.1 million).
Table 6.8
Year
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Amounts imposed for all offences resulting in reparation, 1997 to 2006
<=$100
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
No.
%
4064
31.6
4215
31.9
3836
31.0
3511
30.1
3733
30.4
3585
27.2
4030
25.8
4074
25.3
4120
25.3
4493
25.8
>$100
>$250
>$500
>$1000
Total
Median
>$5000
Total amount
to $250 to $500 to $1000 to $5000
number amount1
2944
22.9
2893
21.9
2551
20.6
2454
21.0
2587
21.1
2774
21.0
3294
21.1
3133
19.5
3064
18.8
3305
19.0
2122
16.5
2224
16.9
2160
17.4
2010
17.2
2126
17.3
2454
18.6
3000
19.2
3174
19.7
3287
20.2
3474
20.0
1497
11.6
1612
12.2
1605
13.0
1527
13.1
1554
12.7
1758
13.3
2133
13.6
2233
13.9
2371
14.6
2407
13.8
1847
14.3
1814
13.7
1834
14.8
1769
15.2
1831
14.9
2110
16.0
2514
16.1
2776
17.2
2722
16.7
2910
16.7
406
3.2
435
3.3
399
3.2
387
3.3
430
3.5
508
3.9
665
4.3
715
4.4
731
4.5
803
4.6
12880
100.0
13193
100.0
12385
100.0
11658
100.0
12261
100.0
13189
100.0
15636
100.0
16105
100.0
16295
100.0
17392
100.0
$218
$11,823,470
$216
$12,302,617
$250
$12,730,338
$250
$12,336,046
$250
$13,094,284
$280
$14,223,766
$300
$18,626,397
$300
$19,870,925
$300
$20,905,444
$300
$23,126,266
Note:
1 The median is the middle value when numbers are arranged from smallest to largest. In this table the median, rather
than the mean, is used as the statistical representation of the average, because the median is not affected by a small
number of very low or very high values.
Reparation is not usually imposed as the only sentence—this was the case for only 21% of
the reparation sentences imposed in 2006 (see Tables 6.9 and 6.10). The number of
reparation sentences imposed in conjunction with other sentences increased by 30% from
10,552 in 1997 to 13,741 in 2006.
The number of reparation sentences imposed in conjunction with custodial sentences in 2006
was 190% higher than in 1997. In 1997, the proportion of reparation sentences that were
imposed in conjunction with custodial sentences was 7%, compared to 16% in 2006.
Reparation sentences imposed in conjunction with a community-based sentence declined
over the decade, from 56% in 1997 to 40% in 2006.
136
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 6.9
Other sentences imposed with reparation, 1997 to 20061
Sentence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Custodial
Community Work
Periodic detention
Community service
Community programme
Supervision
Fine
Deferment
Driving disqualification
Other
Reparation only2
Total
947
698
929
945 1173 1403 2021 2457 2349 2749
3102 6113 5877 5936 6467
4373 4282 3934 3556 3877 1964
1559 1539 1483 1308 1257
570
111
129
77
63
135
15
1134 1461 1069
933
805
610
604
545
544
535
1869 1815 1909 1944 2009 2152 2723 2650 2704 2649
415
368
382
480
431
454
605
653
677
772
144
201
197
160
179
285
400
466
512
569
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2328 2700 2405 2268 2395 2634 3169 3457 3573 3651
12880 13193 12385 11658 12261 13189 15636 16105 16295 17392
Notes:
1 If more than one other sentence was imposed in conjunction with reparation, then only the most serious of the other
sentences is shown in this table.
2 Figures may include associated costs.
Table 6.10 Percentage of reparation sentences imposed with other sentences, 1997
to 2006
Sentence type
Custodial
Community Work
Periodic detention
Community service
Community programme
Supervision
Fine
Deferment
Driving disqualification
Other
Reparation only1
Total
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
7.4
34.0
12.1
0.9
8.8
14.5
3.2
1.1
0.0
18.1
100.0
5.3
32.5
11.7
1.0
11.1
13.8
2.8
1.5
0.0
20.5
100.0
7.5
31.8
12.0
0.6
8.6
15.4
3.1
1.6
0.0
19.4
100.0
8.1
30.5
11.2
0.5
8.0
16.7
4.1
1.4
0.0
19.5
100.0
9.6
31.6
10.3
1.1
6.6
16.4
3.5
1.5
0.0
19.5
100.0
10.6
23.5
14.9
4.3
0.1
4.6
16.3
3.4
2.2
0.0
20.0
100.0
12.9
39.1
3.9
17.4
3.9
2.6
0.0
20.3
100.0
15.3
36.5
3.4
16.5
4.1
2.9
0.0
21.5
100.0
14.4
36.4
3.3
16.6
4.2
3.1
0.0
21.9
100.0
15.8
37.2
3.1
15.2
4.4
3.3
0.0
21.0
100.0
Note:
1 Figures may include associated costs.
6.4
Use of reparation for property offences
In this section the use of reparation is examined in detail for individual property offences to
examine how the proportion of property offences resulting in reparation changed over the
decade. As noted in the introduction to this chapter, property offences have been selected
for further analysis because this offence category accounted for the majority of reparation
sentences imposed during the decade.
Tables 6.11 and 6.12 respectively show the number and percentage of convictions for
individual types of property offences resulting in reparation for each year between 1997 and
2006.
The use of reparation for property offences increased slightly after the Sentencing Act came
into force in 2002.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
137
In each year in the decade, the majority (between 57% and 62%) of wilful damage charges
resulted in reparation. For burglary, there was a marked increase in the use of reparation
towards the end of the decade. In 2006, 32% of burglary offences resulted in reparation,
compared with 22% in 1997. Similarly, Table 6.12 also shows the use of reparation
increased for theft offences, receiving stolen property, motor vehicle conversion, and arson.
Table 6.11
Number of convicted property charges resulting in a sentence of
reparation, by type of property offence, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud
Arson
Wilful damage
Other property
Total
1997
1998
1999
1486 1370 1326
2476 2593 2556
306
313
347
369
337
290
3415 3248 2590
57
60
33
2790 3021 2968
248
265
353
11147 11207 10463
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
1339 1297 1303 1640 1776 1785 1925
2687 2903 3109 3528 3573 3837 4254
316
341
325
405
415
325
382
313
303
316
379
436
410
459
1993 2393 2211 1979 1977 1517 1620
50
41
43
53
69
83
75
3005 2988 3073 3280 3353 3526 3800
275
239
256
383
337
271
311
9978 10505 10636 11647 11936 11754 12826
Table 6.12 Percentage of convicted property charges resulting in a sentence of
reparation, by type of property offence, 1997 to 2006
Offence type
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Burglary
Theft
Receiving stolen goods
Motor vehicle conversion
Fraud
Arson
Wilful damage
Other property
Overall
22.1
18.7
9.9
13.2
18.3
28.8
58.1
5.9
20.8
21.5
18.8
9.3
13.3
19.0
19.2
59.4
5.6
21.0
22.3
18.6
11.6
11.9
17.2
15.8
57.6
6.3
20.4
21.1
20.3
10.5
14.4
13.8
29.4
57.4
5.4
20.1
23.6
20.5
12.1
14.8
16.8
20.7
59.0
5.1
21.6
22.8
22.3
13.3
15.1
17.3
20.2
60.2
4.8
22.4
30.2
24.7
15.5
17.8
14.5
25.0
62.1
7.0
23.8
27.8
25.0
15.2
20.7
14.6
31.5
60.4
6.7
23.9
27.5
27.1
13.0
20.8
13.7
34.9
60.8
6.5
25.3
31.6
29.0
14.2
21.6
15.0
35.9
56.5
7.7
27.1
Table 6.13 shows the proportion of convictions for property offences resulting in a sentence
of reparation in each court area for each of the years from 1997 to 2006. The table shows
that, on a regional basis, the use of reparation varied considerably around the national
average proportion of 21% to 27% of all property charges during the decade. In 2006, for
example, 50% of the property offences in Invercargill resulted in reparation, compared with
14% in North Shore. The use of reparation sentences in property cases increased across
almost all court areas during the decade, with the greatest proportional increase occurring in
Tauranga, where the proportion of property cases receiving reparation increased from 18% to
35%. The next largest increase occurred in Rotorua, where the proportion of property cases
that had reparation imposed increased from 19% in 1997 to 31% in 2006.
138
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table 6.13 Percentage of convictions for property offences resulting in reparation
in each court area, 1997 to 2006
Area
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Whangarei
North Shore
Waitakere
Auckland
Manukau
Tauranga
Hamilton
Rotorua
New Plymouth
Palmerston North
Napier
Gisborne
Wellington
Nelson
Christchurch
Timaru
Dunedin
Invercargill
Overall
23.7
11.1
18.2
13.1
18.0
17.7
16.1
19.4
36.8
24.0
22.7
21.8
23.3
20.9
20.3
26.4
34.7
38.6
20.8
25.6
13.6
18.5
14.2
15.9
15.6
15.6
23.6
32.6
24.4
27.8
18.8
24.7
20.4
19.8
32.5
33.2
33.3
21.0
24.2
14.2
15.9
11.4
13.9
20.4
15.9
21.9
32.8
25.1
21.5
24.9
26.5
25.4
19.2
36.4
28.6
31.1
20.4
28.5
10.1
15.6
10.6
16.9
18.5
19.0
20.1
27.1
21.9
23.3
22.8
21.5
21.4
20.5
33.8
40.4
36.3
20.1
29.9
11.8
19.3
12.5
13.1
23.1
19.2
18.8
27.7
20.3
21.7
22.7
23.9
29.0
22.3
42.8
39.6
44.0
21.6
24.9
13.4
15.7
12.3
13.1
26.9
27.2
22.1
27.1
27.0
27.0
23.4
23.5
31.6
20.7
33.4
34.6
40.6
22.4
28.2
16.5
17.8
15.2
16.6
25.7
24.2
21.4
32.8
23.9
30.6
22.8
26.4
28.0
20.7
36.3
40.1
35.0
23.8
31.6
14.4
17.6
14.6
20.8
27.3
23.5
24.1
26.0
26.2
30.6
30.1
23.2
29.8
21.4
43.6
37.1
40.2
24.2
28.9
22.7
21.5
15.4
21.5
26.2
24.3
24.8
38.4
24.6
27.4
37.5
25.1
32.1
22.0
40.2
41.7
34.7
25.4
29.7
14.1
18.7
17.1
17.4
34.5
27.4
30.5
44.5
31.2
25.1
30.6
30.7
32.5
25.1
37.2
40.0
49.5
27.1
Note:
6.5
Table excludes few charges where court area was not known.
Summary of key findings
The key findings of this chapter are as follows:
•
The number of charges resulting in a fine increased by 4% between 2004 and 2006, from
59,760 to 62,168.
•
On average, over half of the fines imposed each year during the decade were for charges
involving traffic offences.
•
The courts imposed over $31 million in fines in 2006. This represents a 24% increase
from 2005.
•
From 1999 to 2006, between 4% and 5% of cases resulting in a fine also had reparation
imposed, while between 32% and 37% involved a concurrent driving disqualification.
•
The number of convicted charges resulting in reparation sentences increased over the
decade, from 12,880 in 1997 to 17,392 in 2006
•
The total amount of reparation imposed in 2006 was $23.1 million.
•
The majority of charges resulting in a reparation sentence involved property offences.
However, the proportion of all cases resulting in reparation that involved property
offences decreased over the decade, dropping from 87% in 1997 to 74% in 2006.
•
The use of reparation for property offences varied considerably between different court
areas over the decade. In 2006, while half the property cases heard in Invercargill
received a reparation sentence, only 14% of property cases heard in North Shore had a
reparation sentence imposed.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
139
140
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
7
Summary of main findings
This report has presented statistical information on the conviction and sentencing of
offenders in New Zealand for the decade from 1997 to 2006. As noted in Chapter 1, most of
the data presented in this report is available through the Table Builder function on Statistics
New Zealand’s web site (www.stats.govt.nz/productsandservices/table_builder/). Using
Table Builder, it is possible to produce customised tables in order to further explore particular
subjects of interest identified in the report.
This report has provided a detailed overview of statistical trends for data on prosecutions,
convictions, and sentencing for the decade 1997 to 2006. Information has been provided for
each of the eight offence categories (i.e. violent offences, other offences against the person,
property offences, drug offences, offences against good order, offences against justice, traffic
offences and miscellaneous offences). Additional data has also been presented on the
different types of offences within these categories where appropriate. Where necessary,
explanations have been suggested for key changes. Furthermore, key limitations and
problems associated with the interpretation of statistical trends have been documented as
required throughout the report. For this reason, it is important that readers refer to the
appropriate section of the report to ensure they are fully acquainted with issues which may
affect the accurate and reliable interpretation of the data.
This chapter provides a brief summary of the key statistical trends identified in the main body
of the report. The main findings from Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 will be summarised, in turn,
below.
The information presented in this report related to ‘charges’ and ‘cases’. A ‘charge’ refers to
each separate criminal prosecution processed by the courts. For example, where a
defendant is charged with three different offences, these have been counted as three
separate charges. A ‘case’ counts charges against the same individual, and can involve one
or multiple charges. In this report, the charge that was selected to represent the case was
the one that resulted in the most serious penalty. Consequently, less serious charges and
sentences were likely to have been underrepresented in the sections of this report which
related to cases (i.e. Chapters 3, 4, and 5).
The data that has been used in this report was sourced from two databases. Prior to mid2003, information about criminal charges was stored in the Law Enforcement System (LES);
thereafter LES was replaced by the Case Management System (CMS). As noted in Chapter
1, there are some differences between data derived from LES and CMS that are likely to
have affected statistical trends, especially the recording of appeals and the identification of
cases. As this report used data extracted from both systems, caution should be exercised
when interpreting changes in the number of cases across the transition period. For this
reason, decade trends for cases have been presented in this report in two distinct time
periods: 1997 to 2003 and 2004 to 2006.
It is also important to recognise that the number of charges and cases can be affected by
legislative changes, technical changes surrounding the collection and enumeration of offence
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
141
data, as well as alterations in the availability and prioritisation of Police resources for
detecting and investigating offences. For these reasons, changes in the number of criminal
charges and cases highlighted in this report do not necessarily equate to actual changes in
the volume of criminal behaviour.
7.1
Prosecutions and convictions for all offences
This section summarises the main findings from Chapter 2. This chapter examined trends in
the number of prosecutions and convictions for charges processed by the New Zealand court
system between 1997 and 2006. General findings will be presented first, followed by an
overview of key trends across different offence categories.
General findings
In 2006, a total of 308,965 charges were prosecuted in New Zealand courts. This figure was
7% higher than the number prosecuted in 2005. The number of charges prosecuted rose
slightly between 1997 and 1998, before declining between 1998 and 2002. The number
increased from 2003 onwards (rising by 18% between 2002 and 2006).
The most common outcome for charges prosecuted in New Zealand courts was a conviction.
In 2006, 201,517 charges resulted in a conviction. This represented a 7% increase from
2005. However, the proportion of all prosecutions that resulted in a conviction decreased
slightly over the decade. For example, whereas 69% of prosecutions resulted in a conviction
in 1997, 65% did so in 2006.
Traffic charges had the highest conviction rate, with 81% of traffic prosecutions resulting in a
conviction. In terms of the other offence categories, 74% of prosecutions involving charges
against justice, 64% miscellaneous offences, 62% offences against good order, 61% drug
offences, 58% property offences, 55% other offences against the person, and 48% of
prosecutions involving violent offences resulted in a conviction.
After conviction, the next most common result of a prosecution was a ‘not proved’ outcome,
with 30% of all charges resulting in this outcome in 2006. The total number of charges
resulting in a ‘not proved’ outcome in 2006 was 93,270. This was 8% higher than the number
recorded in 2005. Charges involving violent offences and other offences against the person
were most likely to result in this outcome, with 46% and 40% of these charges respectively
recorded as ‘not proved’ in 2006.
Prosecutions resulting in a discharge without conviction accounted for a small but increasing
proportion of all prosecutions over the decade. For example, whereas 1% of prosecutions
resulted in a charge being discharged without conviction in 1997, 2% had this outcome in
2006. Between 1997 and 2006, the number of charges that were discharged without
conviction increased by 71% (from 3,574 to 6,117). This increase has occurred
predominantly in prosecutions involving non-imprisonable offences.
Of all the cases that resulted in a conviction in 2006, the gender of the offender was recorded
in almost every case (i.e. 99.7%). For cases where data on gender was available, the
majority (82%) involved male offenders. Both male and female offenders were most
commonly charged with traffic offences. However, while traffic offences accounted for 44%
142
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
of all female convictions, a slightly smaller proportion (40%) of male convictions involved
traffic offences. In addition, although male offenders were significantly more likely to be
convicted for property offences than female offenders, property offences accounted for a
larger proportion of all female convictions (22%) compared to male convictions (16%).
Information on the age of offenders was available for almost every case (i.e. 99.4%) resulting
in a conviction in 2006. Where the age of the offender was recorded:
•
Less than 1% involved offenders aged 14 to 16 years
•
21% involved offenders aged 17 to 19 years
•
24% involved offenders aged 20 to 24 years
•
14% involved offenders aged 25 to 29 years
•
21% involved offenders aged 30 to 39 years
•
19% involved offenders aged 40 years or more.
Information on the ethnicity of offenders was available for 87% of cases resulting in a
conviction in 2006. Where ethnicity was recorded, 45% of offenders were NZ European,
43% were Māori, 9% were Pacific persons, and 3% were categorised as belonging to other
ethnic groups.
Violent offences
Throughout the decade violent offences consistently comprised approximately 9% of all
charges convicted each year.
The number of convictions for violent offences fluctuated around an average of 15,100
between 1997 and 2002. Between 2002 and 2006, the number increased by 18%. This
increase was predominantly due to a rise in the number of convictions for male assaults
female and serious assault, which respectively increased by 37% and 30% between 2002
and 2006.
In 2006, there were 1,638 convictions involving violent sex offences. This was 10% lower
than the corresponding figure for 2005. The age of the victim was recorded in 97% of these
charges. Where this information was available:
•
41% (663) involved victims under age 12 at the time of the offence
•
33% (534) involved victims aged between 12 and 16 years at the time of the offence
•
25% (409) involved victims aged over 16 at the time of the offence.
Of those convictions that involved victims aged 16 years or under, where the gender of the
victim was recorded, the majority (87%) involved female victims.
Other offences against the person
Charges involving other offences against the person consistently accounted for 2% of all
charges convicted each year over the decade.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
143
The number of convictions for charges involving other offences against the person fluctuated
around an average of 3,600 between 1997 and 1999. From 2000 to 2006, the number
increased by 26%, rising from 3,682 to 4,628, with a 10% increase recorded between 2002
and 2003. This increase was due to a growth in the number of convictions for offences of
intimidation (excluding threatening to kill or do grievous bodily harm), from 560 in 2000 to
1,082 in 2006, as well as a 14% increase in convictions for obstructing or resisting a police
officer or other official, which rose from 2,376 in 2000 to 2,718 in 2006.
Property offences
Charges involving property offences made up the second largest proportion of all convictions
after traffic offences. However, property charges represented a decreasing proportion of all
convictions, dropping from an average of 29% of all convictions each year between 1997 and
2002, to 24% in 2006.
The number of convictions that involved property offences declined by 11% between 1997
and 2002, from 53,674 to 47,546. Between 2002 and 2004, the number increased by 5% to
49,849, before declining by 7% to 46,444 in 2005. The decline was largely due to an 18%
decrease in convictions for fraud and a 16% decrease in ‘other’ property offences between
2004 and 2005. In 2006, the convictions for property offences increased slightly to 47,263.
This increase was predominantly due to a 16% rise in the number of convictions for wilful
damage, in addition to a small increase in the number of convictions for theft (the largest
offence type within the property offence category).
Drug offences
Drug offences accounted for a declining proportion of all convictions over the decade.
Whereas between 1997 and 2003, 7% to 8% of all convictions involved drug offences each
year, only 6% did so between 2004 and 2006.
After rising slightly between 1997 and 1998, the number of convictions for drug offences
decreased steadily between 1998 and 2002, from 14,168 to 12,272. This decrease was due
to a 21% decline in the number of convictions for cannabis-related offences. Between 2003
and 2005, the number dropped by 12% to reach 10,923. This drop can be attributed to a
further decline (20%) in cannabis-related convictions. In 2006, the number of convictions for
drug offences rose by 4% to 11,326. This was largely due to a 12% growth in the number of
convictions for non-cannabis-related drug offences.
Offences against justice
Convictions for offences against justice accounted for an increasing proportion of all
convictions over the decade. Between 1997 and 2003, convictions involving offences against
justice made up 8% to 9% of all convictions, whereas by 2006 they accounted for 12%.
The number of convictions for offences against justice fluctuated around an average of
15,200 between 1997 and 2002. However, between 2002 and 2006, the number increased
by 59% from 14,972 to 23,840. This increase was predominantly due to increases in
convictions for breaches of work-related community sentences, failure to answer bail,
breaching release conditions, and breaching supervision. For example, between 2002 and
144
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
2006, convictions for breaches of work-related community sentences increased by 67% from
6,350 in 2002 to 10,593, convictions for failure to answer bail rose by 65% from 4,393 to
7,263, convictions for breaching release conditions grew by 362% from 309 to 1,427, and
convictions for breaching supervision increased by 137% from 500 to 1,185.
Offences against good order
Convictions for charges involving offences against good order accounted for a small but
increasing proportion of all convictions over the decade. For example, convictions for
offences against good order made up 6% of all convictions between 1997 and 1999, but
accounted for 7% between 2000 and 2006.
Between 1997 and 2003, the number of convictions for offences against good order
increased by 41%, from 9,918 to 13,987. Between 2003 and 2005, the number dropped
slightly to 13,343 in 2005, before increasing by 12% to a decade high of 15,009 in 2006.
Changes in the number of convictions for this offence category have largely been driven by
significant changes in the number of convictions for disorderly behaviour. The number of
convictions for disorderly behaviour rose by 74% between 1997 and 2003, from 4,661 to
8,114, before dropping by 8% to 7,451 in 2005. In 2006, the number of convictions for
disorderly behaviour increased by 15%, to reach a decade high of 8,592.
Traffic offences
Traffic offences accounted for the highest proportion of all convictions during the decade.
However, convictions for traffic offences represented a decreasing proportion of all
convictions over the decade, dropping from 33% in 1997 to 31% in 2006.
The number of traffic convictions increased slightly between 1997 and 1998, then decreased
by 12% between 1998 and 2002. This decline was due to a drop in convictions for driving
with excess alcohol (16%), driving while disqualified (41%), and careless driving (20%).
From a decade low of 54,541 in 2002, the number of traffic convictions has steadily
increased, rising by 16% between 2002 and 2006, to reach 63,360. This was the highest
level recorded over the decade. The increase in traffic convictions from 2002 onwards can
be largely attributed to a growth in the number of convictions for driving with excess alcohol,
which increased by 16% between 2002 and 2006 (from 20,811 to 24,240).
Miscellaneous offences
Charges involving miscellaneous offences made up an increasing proportion of all
convictions during the decade. In the first half of the decade, miscellaneous offences
accounted for an average of 5% of all convictions each year, however, during the second half
of the decade they comprised an average of 8% per annum.
The number of convictions for miscellaneous offences fluctuated around an average of 9,700
between 1997 and 1999, and reached a decade low of 7,663 in 2000. Since 2000, the
number has generally increased, rising by 148% to reach a new decade high of 19,032 in
2006, with a 31% increase occurring between 2005 and 2006. This growth was due to
increases in convictions for tax-related and liquor-related offences. For example, convictions
for tax-related offences rose 231% from 2,269 in 2000 to 7,510 in 2006, while convictions for
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
145
liquor-related offences rose by 2062% from 223 to 4,821 during the same period, following
the introduction of a new offence code pertaining to liquor-ban breaches in 2003. The
increase evident between 2005 and 2006 was principally caused by a rise in convictions for
liquor-related offences (65%), tax-related offences (25%), and ‘other’ miscellaneous offences
(29%).
7.2
Sentencing trends in general
This section summarises key findings from Chapter 3. This chapter presented data on
sentencing patterns for convicted cases. It included information on all types of sentence
available in the period, namely: custodial, community-based, monetary, and deferment.
Because of the difficulties involved in interpreting changes from data drawn from LES and
CMS trends were analysed in two separate periods: before the changes to CMS (1997 to
2003) and after the introduction of CMS (2004 to 2006). This section will describe overall
sentencing patterns across all offences, before briefly summarising main findings for each
offence category.
As noted in Chapter 3, key legislative changes made during the decade affected the
interpretation of sentencing data presented in Chapters 3, 4, 5 and 6. In 2002, two new
pieces of legislation largely replaced the Criminal Justice Act 1985: the Sentencing Act 2002
and the Parole Act 2002. These Acts altered the sentences available to courts, particularly in
relation to community-based sentences. For this reason, the information on periodic
detention and community service sentences before 2002, and community work sentences
after 2002, has often been grouped together and collectively referred to as ‘work-related
community sentences’ in this report. In addition, the Sentencing Act 2002 altered minimum
non-parole periods in relation to determinate sentences for certain types of offence, and
increased the minimum non-parole period for life sentences. It also increased the range of
offences eligible for preventive detention sentences, and reduced the minimum non-parole
period for preventive detention. The Parole Act 2002 altered the proportion of a sentence
required to be served.
General
In 2006, a total of 112,774 cases resulted in a conviction. Of these, 47% resulted in a
monetary penalty, 24% in a work-related community sentence, 11% in a conviction and
discharge, 9% in a custodial sentence, 5% in a deferment, 2% in a supervision sentence, and
2% in ‘other’ sentences.
The total number of cases resulting in a conviction fluctuated between 1997 and 2003.
Between 2004 and 2005, the number dropped slightly (from 109,017 to 107,934), before
increasing by 4% to 112,774 in 2006.
The most common sentence imposed both before and after the LES/CMS transition was a
monetary penalty (fines and/or reparation), with around half of all convicted cases resulting in
this type of sentence as the most serious sentence each year of the decade. Between 1997
and 2000, the number of cases resulting in monetary penalties remained relatively constant
at an average of 47,300 per annum. Between 2000 and 2003, however, the number rose by
146
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
7% to 50,733 in 2003. From 2004 to 2005, the number dropped by 4%, before increasing by
5% to reach 53,207 in 2006.
Within both periods, a work-related community sentence was the next most common type of
sentence imposed. The number of cases resulting in a work-related community sentence as
the most serious sentence increased by 9% between 1997 and 1998, before declining by
15% between 1998 and 2000. From 2000 to 2003, the number of work-related community
sentences imposed remained relatively constant at an average of 25,000 per annum. The
number remained at this level in 2004 and 2005, before increasing by 9% to 27,196 in 2006.
Between 1997 and 2002, the number of cases resulting in a custodial sentence remained
relatively consistent at an average of 8,000 per annum, representing 8% of all convicted
cases. However, from 2002 to 2003, the number increased by 7% from 7,930 to 8,497,
accounting for 9% of all convicted cases in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number
remained stable at an average of 10,500 per annum.
Between 1997 and 2003, the number of cases resulting in a conviction and discharge
increased by 71%, from 4,068 to 6,960. Between 2004 and 2006, the number was stable at
an average of 12,300 per annum. Over the decade, an increasing proportion of all cases
resulted in a conviction and discharge. For example, whereas 4% to 7% of convicted cases
had this outcome from 1997 to 2003, 11% to 12% did so between 2004 and 2006.
An average of 4% and 3% of all convicted cases respectively resulted in deferment and
supervision sentences each year during the decade.
Only a small proportion of cases resulted in ‘other’ sentences during the decade, with 1% to
2% of cases resulting in ‘other’ sentences each year between 1997 and 2006. These
sentences mostly involved disqualifications from driving or orders under section 34 of the
Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003 for the treatment or care of the
offender in a psychiatric hospital or secure facility.
Violent offences
In 2006, there were 11,131 convicted cases involving violent offences. Of these, 33%
resulted in a work-related community sentence as the most serious sentence, 24% received
a custodial sentence, 18% received a monetary penalty, 13% resulted in a deferment, 8%
received supervision sentences, and 3% were convicted and discharged.
Over the decade, an average of 32% of cases involving violent offences had work-related
community sentences imposed each year. Between 1997 and 2001, the number of violent
offences receiving work-related community sentences fluctuated around an average of 3,200,
before increasing by 10% between 2001 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number
increased by 13% from 3,275 to 3,717.
An increasing proportion of violent offence cases resulted in a custodial sentence over the
decade. Between 1997 and 2003, the proportion of convicted cases involving violent
offences receiving custodial sentences increased from 21% to 23%. Between 2004 and
2006, an average of 24% of convicted violent cases had this outcome each year. The
number of violent cases receiving a custodial sentence fluctuated around an average of
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
147
2,200 between 1997 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number increased by 8%, from
2,512 to 2,705.
The proportion of convicted violent cases resulting in monetary penalties averaged 20% each
year between 1997 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the proportion declined from 22% to
18%. Between 2004 and 2006, the number of violent cases receiving monetary penalties
declined by 12%, from 2,226 to 1,950.
The average custodial sentence length imposed for cases involving violent offences
increased from 28 months in 1997 to 29 months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the
average length was 26 months.
Property offences
In 2006, there were 18,965 property cases resulting in a conviction. Of these, 39% received
a work-related community sentence, 31% resulted in a monetary penalty, and 17% resulted
in a custodial sentence being imposed.
Between 1997 and 2003, an average of 42% of convicted property cases resulted in a workrelated community sentence. Between 2004 and 2006, an average of 38% did so. The
number of property cases resulting in work-related community sentences declined between
1998 and 2000, then fluctuated around an average of 7,800 cases per annum from 2000 to
2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number averaged around 7,200 each year.
Across the decade almost one third of property cases each year resulted in monetary
penalties as the most serious sentence.
From 1997 to 2003, the proportion of property cases resulting in a custodial sentence
increased from 13% to 15%. Between 2004 and 2006, 17% of property cases had a
custodial sentence imposed. The number of property cases resulting in imprisonment
generally increased between 1997 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number dropped
slightly from 3,243 to 3,146. The average custodial sentence length increased from almost
10 months in 1997 to almost 12 and a half months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the
average length ranged between 11 and 12 months.
Drug offences
In 2006, there were 5,028 convicted cases that involved drug offences. Of these, 43%
received monetary penalties as the most serious sentence, 27% resulted in work-related
community sentences, and 16% resulted in custodial sentences.
The total number of convicted drug cases generally declined over the decade. Between
2004 and 2006, the number dropped by 13%, from 5,798 to 5,028.
Over the decade, the most common sentence imposed in drug cases was a monetary
penalty, although the proportion of all drug cases receiving monetary penalties dropped from
52% in 1997 to 47% in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the proportion dropped from 45% to
43%. The number of drug cases resulting in monetary penalties declined by 21% between
1997 and 2003, from 3,523 to 2,780. Between 2004 and 2006, the number declined by 16%
from 2,589 to 2,181.
148
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Between 1997 and 2003, an average of 31% of drug cases convicted each year resulted in a
work-related community sentence. Between 2004 and 2006, an average of 27% of these
cases received work-related community sentences. The number of drug cases receiving
work-related community sentences declined each year from 1998 onwards, dropping by 33%
between 1998 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number declined by 12%, from 1,574
to 1,380.
An increasing proportion of drug offence cases resulted in a custodial sentence over the
decade. For example, while 8% to 9% of convicted drug cases resulted in this outcome
between 1997 and 1999, 10% to 15% did so between 2000 and 2003. Between 2004 and
2006, an average of 17% of all convicted cases involving drug offences resulted in
imprisonment each year. The number of drug cases receiving custodial sentences increased
from 1998 to 2003. From 2004 onwards, the number declined each year dropping by 17%
from 976 in 2004 to 813 in 2006.
The average custodial sentence imposed for drug cases increased from 16 months in 1997
to 19 months in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the average length increased from 20
months to 22 and a half months.
Offences against justice
In 2006, there were a total of 12,819 convicted cases that involved offences against justice.
Of these, 52% resulted in a conviction and discharge, 26% received work-related community
sentences, and 9% resulted in a custodial sentence.
The proportion of cases involving offences against justice that resulted in a conviction and
discharge increased over the decade, between 1997 and 2000 the proportion ranged from
14% to 15%, while in 2006 52% of such cases had this outcome. Between 1997 and 2003,
the number of cases involving offences against justice that resulted in a conviction and
discharge increased by 126%, rising from 823 to 1,858. From 2004 to 2005, the number
increased by 20% from 5,612 to 6,740, before dropping slightly to 6,621 in 2006.
Over the decade, the proportion of offences against justice cases resulting in a custodial
sentence declined, from 15% in 1997 to 10% in 2003. From 2004 to 2006, the proportion
dropped from 10% to 9%. Between 2004 and 2006, the number of cases involving offences
against justice receiving custodial sentences increased by 12%, from 1,076 to 1,206.
Traffic offences
In 2006, there were 45,919 traffic cases resulting in a conviction. Of these, 66% resulted in
the imposition of monetary penalties, 21% resulted in work-related community penalties and
5% received custodial sentences.
Over the decade, most convicted traffic cases resulted in monetary penalties, with around
two-thirds of traffic cases resulting in fines and/or reparation each year. The number of traffic
cases receiving monetary penalties averaged 27,900 between 1997 and 2003, and 29,900
between 2004 and 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
149
A declining proportion of traffic cases resulted in work-related community sentences over the
decade. For example, 25% of traffic cases had a work-related community sentence imposed
in 1997, compared to 21% in 2006. The number of traffic cases receiving work-related
community penalties declined by 28% between 1997 and 2002, from 10,681 to 7,701, rising
to 8,164 in 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the number rose by 16% from 8,263 to 9,563.
Between 1997 and 2003, 4% of traffic cases resulted in imprisonment each year. Between
2004 and 2006, 5% of traffic cases received custodial sentences. Between 1997 and 2003,
an average of 1,700 traffic cases resulted in custodial sentences each year. From 2004 to
2006, the number averaged around 2,100 each year. The average length of imprisonment
imposed for traffic sentences increased over the decade from just under 5 and a half months
in 1997 to almost 7 months in 2006.
7.3
Custodial sentences and remands
This section summarises the main findings from Chapter 4. This chapter presented trends in
cases resulting in imprisonment over the decade, including the length of sentence imposed.
Using data from the Department of Corrections, it also analysed decade trends in the
average annual prison population, including remand prisoners.
In 2006, 10,469 cases resulted in a custodial sentence. Of these, 30% involved property
offences, 26% involved violent offences, 20% traffic offences, 12% offences against justice,
8% drug offences, 2% offences against good order, 2% miscellaneous offences, and 1%
other offences against the person.
The majority of cases resulting in a custodial sentence involved males (90%).
Where the offender’s age was known:
•
less than 1% involved offenders aged 14 to 16 years
•
12% involved offenders aged 17 to 19 years
•
24% involved offenders aged 20 to 24 years
•
17% involved offenders aged 25 to 29 years
•
26% involved offenders aged 30 to 39 years
•
20% involved offenders aged 40 years or over.
Where the offender’s ethnicity was recorded, 53% of all cases resulting in custody involved
Mäori, 37% involved NZ Europeans, 7% involved Pacific persons, and 3% of cases involved
offenders from other ethnic groups.
In 2006, 29% of cases resulting in custody had a sentence of under 3 months’ duration
imposed, and 70% resulted in sentences that were 12 months or less. This was similar to
results found in 2005. Between 1997 and 2003, the average custodial sentence length
increased by 16% from 13 and a half months to almost 16 months. Between 2004 and 2006,
the average length was stable at 14 months.
150
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
A small proportion of cases resulted in life imprisonment and preventive detention sentences
over the decade, with such sentences accounting for less than 1% of custodial sentences
imposed each year. In 2006, there were 25 life sentences and 12 preventive detention
sentences imposed. Between 1997 and 2003, the average non-parole period imposed on life
sentences increased from 11 to 14 years. Between 2004 and 2006, the average length was
between 14 and 15 years. In contrast, non-parole periods imposed on preventive detention
sentences declined from a peak of 11 and a half years in 1998 to 7 years in 2003. Between
2004 and 2006, the average length of non-parole imposed on preventive detention sentences
was just under 7 years.
Figures supplied by the Department of Corrections show that the average annual prison
population increased by 47% over the decade. In 2006, the average prison population
reached 7,595, the highest level recorded during the decade. This represented a 7%
increase from 2005.
The annual average number of sentenced prisoners grew by 32% over the decade, rising
from 4,587 in 1997 to 6,050 in 2006. Male prisoners accounted for the majority of the
sentenced prison population. However, the proportion of female prisoners in the sentenced
prisoner population rose from 4% (187) in 1997 to 6% (350) in 2006.
Over the decade, the proportion of the prison population on remand has almost doubled,
rising from 11% in 1997 to 20% in 2006. The annual average number of prisoners on
remand increased by 165% during the decade, from 565 in 1997 to 1,495 in 2006, with a
19% increase between 2005 and 2006. While male prisoners accounted for the majority of
remand prisoners, the proportion of female remand prisoners increased from 3% (19) in 1997
to 5% (79) in 2006. Between 2004 and 2006, the overall average time spent on remand
increased from 47 days to 52 days.
7.4
Community-based sentences
This section summarises the main findings from Chapter 5. This chapter explored trends in
cases resulting in community-based sentences, in particular, work-related community
sentences and supervision. The main findings relating to each of these types of sentence
are presented below.
Work-related community sentences
In 2006, 27,196 cases resulted in a work-related community sentence as the most serious
sentence. This represented a 9% increase compared to 2005. The majority of these
involved either traffic or property offences, which respectively accounted for 35% and 27% of
all work-related community sentences imposed in 2006.
Across the decade cases involving traffic offences represented the largest proportion of all
cases resulting in work-related community sentences. Between 2004 and 2006, the number
of traffic cases receiving this sentence increased by 16%.
Cases involving property offences represented the next largest proportion of cases receiving
work-related community sentences. The number of such sentences imposed for property
cases fluctuated around an average of 7,600 per annum over the decade.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
151
Cases involving violent offences accounted for an average of 14% of work-related community
sentences imposed between 2004 and 2006. During this time, the number of violent cases
receiving this type of sentence increased by 13%, from 3,275 to 3,717.
Between 1997 and 2003, the average length of work-related community sentences imposed
was 124 hours. Between 2004 and 2006, the average declined from 123 hours to 116 hours.
Supervision
In 2006, 2,243 cases resulted in supervision as the most serious sentence. Of these, 39%
related to cases involving violent offences, and 22% related to cases involving property
offences.
Between 1997 and 2003, the number of cases resulting in supervision decreased by 62%.
Between 2004 and 2005, the number increased from 2,014 to 2,347, before dropping to
2,243 in 2006. Across the decade, cases involving violent offences were most likely to result
in a supervision sentence being imposed.
Over the decade, the overall average length of supervision orders imposed was around 10
months.
7.5
Monetary penalties
This section presents key findings from Chapter 6. This chapter examined data on convicted
charges resulting in monetary penalties. It discussed trends for both types of monetary
penalties: namely, fines and reparation. The information presented in this chapter related to
charges not cases. Consequently, unlike the case information presented in Chapters 3, 4,
and 5, the data in this chapter included all charges resulting in a monetary penalty regardless
of whether this was the most serious sentence imposed.
Fines
A total of 62,168 charges resulted in fines in 2006. This represented a 7% increase
compared to 2005. Of these charges, 52% involved traffic offences, 20% involved
miscellaneous offences, and 10% related to offences against good order.
Over the decade the number of charges resulting in a fine increased by 10%, from 56,276 in
1997 to 62,168 in 2006.
Charges involving traffic offences accounted for the majority of all fines during the decade,
with an average of 54% of traffic charges each year resulting in fines. Between 1997 and
2006, the number of traffic charges receiving a fine increased by 4%, from 31,158 to 32,451.
Between 1997 and 2006, charges involving miscellaneous offences represented an
increasing proportion of all charges resulting in fines. The number of miscellaneous charges
resulting in the imposition of a fine almost doubled over the decade, and between 2005 and
2006 rose by 30%, from 9,554 to 12,449.
152
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
The median fine imposed increased from $250 in 1997 to $300 in 1999, and subsequently
remained at this level. The total amount of fines imposed increased by 35% over the decade,
from $23 million in 1997 to $31 million in 2006.
Reparation
In 2006, 17,392 charges resulted in reparation sentences. This represented a 7% increase
from 2005. Of these, 74% involved property offences, 12% involved traffic offences, and
10% involved violent offences.
During the decade, the number of charges resulting in reparation sentences increased by
35%, from 12,880 in 1997 to 17,392 in 2006, with a 19% increase between 2002 and 2003,
following the introduction of the Sentencing Act 2002, which introduced a stronger
presumption in favour of reparation.
Charges involving property offences accounted for the majority of reparation sentences
imposed over the decade. The number of property charges resulting in reparation sentences
increased by 15% between 1997 and 2006, from 11,147 to 12,826. However, property
offences represented a declining proportion of all charges resulting in reparation. For
example, while 87% of reparation sentences involved charges relating to property offences in
1997, 74% did so in 2006. Reparation has therefore increasingly been imposed for other
types of offences over the course of the decade.
Between 1997 and 2006, the number of violent charges resulting in reparation more than
tripled, rising from 539 to 1,741. The number of traffic charges resulting in reparation also
tripled during this time, rising from 698 in 1997 to 2,104 in 2006.
The median amount of reparation imposed increased from $218 in 1997 to $300 in 2006.
The total amount of reparation imposed almost doubled over the decade, growing from $12
million in 1997 to $23 million in 2006.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
153
154
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
References
Department of Corrections (2004) Census of Prison Inmates and Home Detainees 2003.
Wellington: Department of Corrections.
Galaway, B. and Spier, P. (1992) Sentencing to Reparation: Implementation of the Criminal
Justice Act 1985. Wellington: Department of Justice.
Lash, B. (2005) Young People and Alcohol: Some Statistics to 2003 and 2004 on Possible
Effects of Lowering the Purchase Age. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Mayhew, P. and Reilly, J. (2007) The New Zealand Crime and Safety Survey 2006.
Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Ministry of Justice (2002) Reforming the Criminal Justice System: Sentencing Act 2002,
Parole Act 2002. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Newton, A. (2007) 2006 Clandestine Drug Laboratory (Clan Lab) Report. Wellington: New
Zealand Police (http://www.police.govt.nz/resources/2007/clandestine-drug-lab/2006clan-lab-report.html) accessed on October 29 2007.
New Zealand Police (2003) National Crime Statistics for 2002. Media Release, 11 March
2003.
New Zealand Police (2005) Crime Down Across the Board – 8.2 per cent reduction. Media
Release, 3 March 2005.
Searle, W. (2003) Court-Imposed Fines: A Survey of Judges. Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Searle, W., Slater, T., Knaggs, T., November, J. and Clark, C. (2004) Status Hearings
Evaluation: A New Zealand Study of Pre-trial Hearings in Criminal Cases. Wellington:
Ministry of Justice and Law Commission.
Spier, P., Luketina, F. and Kettles, S. (1991) Changes in the Seriousness of Offending and in
the Pattern of Sentencing: 1979 to 1988. Wellington: Department of Justice.
Spier, P. (1997) Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1987 to 1996.
Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Spier, P. (1998) Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1988 to 1997.
Wellington: Ministry of Justice.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
155
156
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Appendix A
Table A1
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by type of offence and
ethnicity of offender, 20051, 2
NZ European
Mäori
Offence type
Violent
Other against
persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
Pacific
peoples
No.
%
1391
13
No.
3933
%
37
No.
5084
%
47
786
45
745
43
154
7202
2713
4170
3667
16521
1675
40667
43
54
38
43
49
48
45
7987
2055
5772
3817
12734
1391
39585
48
41
52
45
38
40
43
1221
189
957
797
3228
328
8265
Other
Unknown
Total
No.
349
%
3
No.
366
No.
11123
9
46
3
58
1789
7
4
9
9
10
9
9
362
96
178
214
1286
93
2624
2
2
2
3
4
3
3
1668
148
1476
202
10272
1852
16042
18440
5201
12553
8697
44041
5339
107183
Notes:
1 Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data quality.
2 Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where ethnicity was not known.
Table A2
Total number of cases resulting in conviction, by most serious sentence
imposed and ethnicity of the offender, 20051,2
NZ European
Most serious
sentence
Custodial
Community work
Supervision
Monetary
Deferment
Other
Conviction &
discharge
Total
Mäori
No.
3809
9242
922
19973
1897
754
%
38
41
41
51
41
49
No.
5174
10871
989
14339
2104
623
%
52
48
44
37
45
41
Pacific
peoples
No.
%
737
7
1975
9
289
13
3525
9
476
10
96
6
4070
37
5485
50
1167
40667
45
39585
43
8265
Other
No.
243
482
50
1369
164
54
11
9
Unknown
%
Total
2
2
2
3
4
4
No.
590
2428
97
10818
274
370
No.
10553
24998
2347
50024
4915
1897
262
2
1465
12449
2624
3
16042
107183
Notes:
1 Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data quality.
2 Column percentages were calculated excluding cases where ethnicity was not known.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
157
Table A3
Gender & age
Male
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Female
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Total2
14 to 16
17 to 19
20 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40+
Unknown
Total
Gender, age, and ethnicity1 of offenders in all cases resulting in a
custodial sentence, 2005
NZ
European
Mäori
Pacific
peoples
Other
Unknown
Total
6
430
738
561
931
846
0
3512
22
609
1166
809
1301
725
0
4632
4
106
179
125
178
106
1
699
0
20
56
44
65
30
0
215
1
65
68
61
88
94
28
405
33
1230
2207
1600
2563
1801
29
9463
0
14
56
36
101
88
0
295
0
73
129
75
163
101
0
541
0
4
5
9
8
12
0
38
0
2
3
3
10
9
1
28
0
4
26
22
66
54
11
183
0
97
219
145
348
264
12
1085
6
444
794
597
1032
934
0
3807
22
682
1295
884
1464
826
0
5173
4
110
184
134
186
118
1
737
0
22
59
47
75
39
1
243
1
69
94
83
154
148
39
588
33
1327
2426
1745
2911
2065
41
10548
Notes:
1 Note the comments in Section 1.5 on the way ethnicity data is collected, and the implications this has for data quality.
2 Numbers exclude cases where the gender of the offender was not available.
158
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
Table A4
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2004
Offence type
No. of cases
involving a
custodial
remand
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
3795
254
4778
1099
2155
677
1418
192
14368
Custodial
No. of
No. of
remand cases
custodial
convicted
as a % of all remand cases
custodial
cases1
convicted
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
21.6
2426
1832
9.8
161
75
17.4
3471
2259
15.1
743
501
15.2
1595
477
6.5
421
104
4.0
1239
698
3.2
131
72
11.9
10187
6018
% of convicted
custodial
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
48.3
29.5
47.3
45.6
22.1
15.4
49.2
37.5
41.9
Note:
1 Percentage calculated from all cases of duration of more than one day.
Table A5
All cases involving a remand in custody, by type of offence and outcome
of case, 2005
Offence type
Violent
Other against persons
Property
Drug
Against justice
Good order
Traffic
Miscellaneous
Total
No. of cases
involving a
custodial
remand
4104
255
4934
1067
2106
643
1400
244
14753
Custodial
No. of
No. of
remand cases
custodial
convicted
as a % of all remand cases
custodial
cases1
convicted
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
22.1
2648
1977
10.8
172
71
19.2
3476
2320
16.7
705
524
15.0
1612
599
6.6
417
119
4.1
1240
758
4.1
156
94
12.6
10426
6462
% of convicted
custodial
remand cases
awarded a
custodial
sentence
48.2
27.8
47.0
49.1
28.4
18.5
54.1
38.5
43.8
Note:
1 Percentage calculated from all cases of duration of more than one day.
Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand: 1997 to 2006
159
Corp 357
ISSN 1177-9799 (Online)