He pleaded guilty to other charges - assault with intent to injure, assault on a person in a family relationship, and wilful damage.
The man and the complainant were only in a relationship for three months but it quickly grew violent, Judge Harvey said.
On April 7, 2020, the man arrived home intoxicated with two mates and some alcohol.
He accused the woman of being unfaithful with her cousin, called her derogatory names, and kicked and punched her in front of his mates.
He went outside with the others but returned indoors where he strangled her to a point she felt she would pass out, then made her perform oral sex on him, ripped off her night gown, and raped her.
She said she complied out of fear.
The man detained her at home for eight days regularly administering slaps, which the woman described as "fine tuning", and strangling her about nine more times.
The man denied the offending giving evidence that numerous people visited the house and the woman was fine. Judge Harvey noted the jury rejected the claim. He too was satisfied the woman was telling the truth and that the man detained the woman to hide what he did to her.
The last strangulation happened after the woman made a break for freedom by running down the road but was chased down by the man who damaged a letterbox and threatened to kill her.
In a victim impact statement, the woman said little things like smells triggered bad memories of the man.
During their relationship she was constantly in pain but could not let it show for fear of making things worse.
She had no physical scars but emotional ones. She could not bear wearing anything around her neck as it made her relive the strangulations.
Her biggest fear was the man. She did not trust or feel safe near him or his family and had moved away from Whangārei.
Crown prosecutor Connor Taylor sought a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of 50 per cent.
The offending involved significant premeditation. The man used violence to isolate and control the woman and took advantage of his knowledge she was already the complainant in another sexual case, Taylor said.
The man had shown no remorse. His offending negated claims in a cultural report about him having a protective stance towards women, Taylor said.
Counsel Arthur Fairlie told the court the man will appeal the convictions and argued against an MPI.
Contrary to the Crown's submissions, the cultural report did establish a nexus between the man's upbringing and this offending, Fairlie said. The man's background, which included pro-criminal gang-related role modelling, substance abuse, and poor mental health, created a certain attitude in him towards women and authorities.
While conscious the man's family were present in court to support him, it was fair to say that as a young man he was virtually abandoned. He had been in 13 children's homes and suffered various abuses.
The man's extensive previous conviction list was also testimony to his "extraordinarily difficult" background, Fairlie said.
Judge Harvey noted the man's remarks to a pre-sentence report writer that he felt he was helping out the complainant, that arguments and violence stemmed from her jealousy and motivated false allegations against him.
Taking the sexual offences as the lead charges, the judge set a starting point in line with a tariff case, of 11 years imprisonment.
He uplifted it by two and a half years for the other offences and a further nine months for the man's previous convictions.
The judge gave three months discount for the belated guilty pleas to some charges and 15 per cent discount for factors raised in the cultural report.
He agreed there should be a 50% minimum period of imprisonment - the man will have to serve at least five years, 11 months, before he is eligible for parole.
