Commissioner of Police v Ieremia

[2020] NZHC 1203

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CIV-2020-404-366

[2020] NZHC 1203

BETWEEN

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Applicant

AND

ROCKY TOLUFALE IEREMIA

Respondent

Hearing:	On the papers
Appearances:	H MacDonald and A Masters for the Commissioner R Mansfield for Respondent
Judgment:	3 June 2020

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application for civil forfeiture orders under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009]

This judgment was delivered by me on 3 June 2020 at 11.30 am, pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules.

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date……………

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Auckland Counsel:

R Mansfield, Barrister, Auckland

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v IEREMIA [2020] NZHC 1203 [3 June 2020]

[1]                 In this proceeding the Commissioner of Police (the Commissioner) seeks forfeiture orders under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (the Act) against Mr Ieremia. The parties now seek the Court’s approval under s 95 of the Act to a settlement of the litigation between them.

Background

[2]                 On 28 May 2019 the police executed five search warrants in the greater Auckland area targeting a drug distribution network. Mr Ieremia was one of the persons arrested as a result of that operation.

[3]                 When the police searched Mr Ieremia’s home address they discovered $49,660 in cash (the cash), 56 grams of methamphetamine and two sets of digital scales. The methamphetamine and cash were found concealed within multiple layers of plastic bags that were wrapped within a duvet lying next to Mr Ieremia’s bed. The methamphetamine had a purity of 80 per cent and would have cost approximately

$16,800 to acquire.

[4]                 On 7 February 2020 Mr Ieremia pleaded guilty to a charge of being in possession of the methamphetamine for the purposes of supplying it to others. He is to be sentenced on that charge in the District Court on 3 July 2020.

The proposed settlement

[5]The proposed settlement is on the following terms:

(a)The Court will make an assets forfeiture order under s 50(1) of the Act by consent in relation to the cash and any accrued interest; and

(b)The Commissioner will not seek a profit forfeiture order against Mr Iremeia; and

(c)The costs of the present proceeding are to lie where they fall.

Decision

[6]                 I am satisfied the proposed settlement recognises the primary purpose of the Act, which is to provide for forfeiture of property derived directly or indirectly from significant criminal activity, or property representing the value of a person’s unlawfully derived income.1

[7]                 The proposed settlement removes from Mr Ieremia’s possession and ownership the whole of the cash found in close proximity to the methamphetamine. The cash was in all likelihood derived from previous drug-related transactions. The proposed settlement also allows the parties to have certainty and control as to the outcome of the present litigation.

[8]                 I therefore approve the proposed settlement and make an assets forfeiture order by consent under s 50(1) of the Act in relation to the cash seized by the police from Mr Ieremia’s property together with any interest accrued thereon.

[9]The costs in the present proceeding are to lie where they fall.

[10]              I record that the Commissioner will not pursue the application for a profit forfeiture order against Mr Ieremia, and that the orders now made by consent are in full and final settlement of the present proceeding.

[11]              I vacate the listing of this matter on 4 June 2020 and excuse attendances on that date.

Lang J

1      Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009, s 31(a) and (b).