Commissioner of Police v Latimer

[2024] NZHC 3970

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE

CIV-2023-470-14

[2024] NZHC 3970

BETWEEN

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Applicant

AND

TRITAN LATIMER

First Respondent

BILLY TAMA REILLY
Second Respondent

LYRIC FURLONG

Third Respondent

Hearing:

On the papers

Counsel:

R W Jenson for Applicant

No appearance for respondents (no steps taken)

Judgment:

20 December 2024

JUDGMENT OF LANG J

[on application for asset forfeiture orders]

This judgment was delivered by Justice Lang

On 20 December 2024 at 11.00 am Pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Date:…………………………

Solicitors/counsel:

Pollett Legal Ltd, Tauranga W T Nabney, Tauranga

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v LATIMER [2024] NZHC 3970 [20 December 2024]

[1]                  The Commissioner of Police seeks a Type  1 assets forfeiture order under      s 50(1) of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (the Act).

[2]The assets in respect of which the Commissioner seeks orders are:

(a)the sum of $5,955.70 being the sale proceeds of a 2009 Audi S5 motor vehicle, registration NKT515;

(b)the sum of $7,565 in cash seized from that vehicle on 21 November 2022.

[3]                  The respondents have been served with this proceeding but have taken no steps to oppose it. I therefore deal with the application on a formal proof basis.

[4]                  Having read the evidence and the submissions filed by the Commissioner, I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that both the motor vehicle and the cash are tainted property in terms of the definition of that term contained in s 5 of the Act. I draw this conclusion from the fact that the cash was found in close proximity to more than 400 grams of methamphetamine in the Audi motor vehicle that the police stopped on 21 November 2022. The first respondent, Mr Latimer, was driving the vehicle at the time. Mr Latimer was subsequently convicted of being in possession of 404.7 grams of methamphetamine.

[5]                  The evidence filed by the Commissioner also establishes on the balance of probabilities that, although the Audi motor vehicle was owned by a third party, it was in all likelihood purchased  for cash  by  Mr Latimer.  The explanations  given by  Mr Latimer to the police in relation to both the presence of the cash and the ownership of the vehicle are improbable to say the least.

[6]                  I therefore make asset forfeiture orders under s 50(1) of the Act. The cash and sale proceeds of the motor vehicle are both to vest in the Crown absolutely.

Lang J