Deer v The Queen - [2018] NZHC 206

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2017-404-000421

[2018] NZHC 206

BETWEEN
LANCE ANDREW NORTON DEER

Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Hearing: 5 February 2018

Appearances:

M Pecotic for the Appellant

A McConachy for the Respondent

Judgment:

21 February 2018

JUDGMENT OF HINTON J

This judgment was delivered by me on 21 February 2018 at 3.30 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules

…………………………………………………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Counsel/Solicitors:
Maria Pecotic, Barrister, Auckland Meredith Connell, Auckland

DEER v R [2018] NZHC 206 [21 February 2018]

Introduction

[1] Lance Deer pleaded guilty to one charge of possession of methamphetamine for supply in the District Court. Judge Sinclair sentenced him to two years and six months’ imprisonment on 26 October 2017.

[2]Mr Deer now appeals his sentence.

Facts

[3] On Saturday 2 April 2016 Mr Deer and an associate visited a hotel in Auckland. They arrived by motorcycle at about 7.25 pm and parked in a car park behind the hotel. They then entered a room for which they had an electronic key.

[4] Security staff found a bag next to the motorcycle a short time later. Reception staff searched the bag. They found a large amount of cash and two containers filled with white crystalline material. A later search confirmed the bag contained 19.8 grams of methamphetamine, $13,960 in cash and an extendable baton.

[5] Mr Deer approached reception and told them the bag was his. The manager was in the process of contacting the police. He asked Mr Deer for identification. Mr Deer grabbed the bag and ran out of the hotel. Security staff pursued him into the car park.

[6] Mr Deer ran towards the motorcycle on which he arrived. A short struggle ensued after security staff approached him near the motorcycle. Some of the contents of the bag fell onto the carpark. Security staff stayed with Mr Deer until the police arrived.

District Court

[7] Mr Deer was originally charged with possession of methamphetamine for supply and possession of an offensive weapon. He sought a sentence indication for these charges on 2 September 2016, which he declined. Mr Deer was subsequently charged with two other charges but those were withdrawn.

[8] He sought a sentence indication again, seemingly after the Crown chose not to proceed with the offensive weapon charge. Judge Sinclair gave the sentence indication on 24 March 2017. Mr Deer entered a guilty plea to the charge of possessing methamphetamine for supply, but he challenged the degree of commerciality. There was a disputed facts hearing over the ownership of the money located by the Police, this being the only evidence of commerciality. Mr Deer’s partner said the money was hers. Judge Sinclair did not accept her evidence and found the cash was part of Mr Deer’s drug dealing activities. He was sentenced on 26 October 2017. Over the intervening period, Mr Deer was subject to restrictive bail conditions and was in custody for approximately…

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 Deer v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Deer v The Queen [2018] NZHC 206
Case: [2018] NZHC 206
Decision Date: 21 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lance Deer appeals against his sentence for possession of methamphetamine for supply. The appeal was heard in the High Court of New Zealand in Auckland, where the appellant was represented by Maria Pecotic and the respondent by A McConachy. The court considered whether the starting point for sentencing was manifestly excessive, whether the discount for rehabilitation and restrictive bail conditions was sufficient, and whether home detention was a more appropriate sentence.

The court determined that the starting point of three and a half years was within the available range, as the judge was entitled to find commerciality involved based on the quantity of methamphetamine and the cash found in the same bag. The court also found that the discount for rehabilitative measures and restrictive bail conditions was not outside of the available range, and that a discount for remorse was not appropriate. The court rejected the argument that home detention was a more appropriate sentence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence of two years and six months' imprisonment was upheld. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and that there was no basis for imposing a different sentence.

Orders