In March, Craig Phillip Duell, 55, was sentenced to 24 months’ imprisonment on a raft of charges, including threatening to kill and unlawfully possessing a pistol.
But in May, he won an appeal in the High Court, which resulted in his sentence being reduced to 18 months.
The original sentence came after three Waitaki District Council workers showed up to Duell’s Palmerston house on September 11 last year to seize his dog, which he was disqualified from owning.
Two police officers also attended, and Duell responded by threatening the group.
‘‘I’ve got the ability to shoot you c***,’’ Duell said when they arrived.
The threat prompted the group to run for cover and call for back-up, and later a search of the defendant’s home turned up a loaded sawn-off double-barrelled shotgun, wrapped in clothing, just metres from where he had issued the threat.
Before that took place, though, Duell drove off with his dog, but he only got as far as Blueskin Bay, where police deployed road spikes and arrested him.
The subsequent search of his house revealed the defendant’s stash of ‘‘hundreds’’ of used and unused needles and syringes commonly used for injecting drugs, court documents said.
Duell admitted being a ‘‘casual’’ methamphetamine user.
And the defendant’s aggression had also been displayed to officers in August.
Duell had pulled up at Bayfield Park, where officers chanced upon him and arrested him because of outstanding warrants.
He became ‘‘agitated’’ and began reversing away before being blocked by a police car.
Officers managed to open Duell’s door before he could escape and doused him with pepper spray.
The court heard the defendant continued to disobey instructions and had to be physically restrained so handcuffs could be applied.
At sentencing, Judge David Robinson refused to give the defendant home detention, saying the offending warranted a more stern response.
Justice Robert Osborne, who heard the appeal, agreed, but thought a 24-month sentence was ‘‘manifestly excessive’’ when compared with other similar cases.
‘‘Loaded firearms are anathema within our community,’’ Justice Osborne said.
‘‘Were the combination of a repeated threat and the presence of a loaded pistol in this case not to result in a sentence of imprisonment, the court would not sufficiently be punishing those aspects of the offending which call for unequivocal denunciation.’’
