Cole v The King - [2025] NZCA 355

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA

CA136/2025
[2025] NZCA 355

BETWEEN	BRANDON ST JOHN COLE Appellant
AND	THE KING Respondent

Hearing:	24 June 2025
Court:	Woolford, Dunningham and Walker JJ
Counsel:	J N Olsen for Appellant B D Tantrum and C R Purdon for Respondent
Judgment:	24 July 2025 at 12 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A The application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.

B The appeal against sentence is allowed.

CThe minimum period of imprisonment is set aside.

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Dunningham J)

Mr Cole pleaded guilty to one charge each of importation and supply of methamphetamine, and three charges of money laundering. He was sentenced to 22 years’ imprisonment by Becroft J.[1] The Judge also imposed a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) of 10 years, being the maximum available.[2]
[1]R v Cole [2024] NZHC 3518.
[2]Sentencing Act 2002, s 86(4).
Mr Cole appeals his sentence solely on the ground the imposition of a 10‑year MPI was not warranted in his case.

Application for an extension of time

Mr Cole’s appeal is filed out of time. He explains why in an affidavit affirmed on 10 June 2025. The reasons include difficulties with his medication for mental health issues, several changes in custodial location and difficulties in communicating with relevant people over the Christmas break.
The delay is explained and the Crown does not oppose an extension of time. Accordingly, we grant an extension of time.[3]

The offending

[3]Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 248(4).

The offending involved the importation and subsequent supply of over 450 kilograms of high quality methamphetamine. This was effected by arranging the importation of a piece of commercial machinery, a rotary separator, into the country with the methamphetamine inside it. It was then dismantled and, with the assistance of others, the methamphetamine was on‑sold.
The offending was only identified as a result of Australian Federal Police intercepting a similar piece of commercial equipment at the Australian border which was found to contain 556 kilograms of methamphetamine contained in one‑kilogram bags which were numbered up to 556. This then led New Zealand Police to execute a search on the premises where Mr Cole had arranged for the rotary separator to be delivered. The result of the search was that the police located a number of empty numbered bags containing crystal methamphetamine residue, with the highest numbered bag being bag 451. They also found large amounts of crystal methamphetamine residue in two large storage bins, along with scales, plastic scoops, disposable gloves and zip lock plastic bags.
Mr Cole accepted that 451 kilograms of methamphetamine were imported into New Zealand through the rotary separator.
Police located almost $2,400,000 in cash in a lock up rented by Mr Cole’s father and which Mr Cole had access to. Subsequent investigation revealed Mr Cole had laundered over $850,000 of drug money into various bank accounts and the purchase of two vehicles.

The High Court…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Cole v The King

Details

AGLC: Cole v The King [2025] NZCA 355
Case: [2025] NZCA 355
Decision Date: 24 July 2025 at 12 pm

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal in Cole v The King was heard by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand on 24 June 2025. The appellant, Brandon St John Cole, appealed against his sentence for importation and supply of methamphetamine and money laundering. The Crown did not oppose the extension of time to appeal, which was subsequently granted by the court. The appeal was allowed and the minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) was set aside.

The key legal issue before the court was whether the imposition of a 10-year MPI was warranted in Mr Cole’s case. The court examined the principles outlined in Zhang v R, which state that MPIs must not be imposed as a matter of routine or in a mechanistic way, and that a reasoned analysis is required as to the imposition of an MPI and its length. The court also considered the principles of deterrence, denunciation and accountability, and whether these were sufficiently met by Mr Cole’s end sentence of 22 years’ imprisonment and the standard non-parole period of seven years and four months’ imprisonment.

The court found that the end sentence imposed on Mr Cole was sufficient to hold him accountable for the harm done to the community, to denounce his conduct, and to deter him and others from similar offending. Mr Cole’s acknowledged remorse and demonstrated commitment to rehabilitation, along with his acceptance of the enormity of his offending and the consequences for his family, further suggested there was no obvious need to protect the community by imposing an MPI. The court concluded that the principle of general deterrence did not outweigh all the factors which pointed against the need to impose an MPI.

The final orders of the court were that the application for an extension of time to appeal was granted, the appeal against sentence was allowed, and the minimum period of imprisonment was set aside.

Orders