Hardy v The Queen

Case [2017] NZCA 327


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND

CA627/2016
[2017] NZCA 327

BETWEEN

CAMPBELL MURRAY HARDY
Appellant

AND

THE QUEEN
Respondent

Hearing:

21 June 2017

Court:

Clifford, Lang and Mander JJ

Counsel:

D A Ewen for Appellant
R K Thomson for Respondent

Judgment:

28 July 2017 at 4 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.

BThe appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS OF THE COURT

(Given by Lang J)

  1. Mr Hardy was found guilty by a jury in the District Court at Hamilton on a representative charge of manufacturing methamphetamine over a nine month period.  The jury also found Mr Hardy guilty on charges of being in possession of equipment for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine and being in unlawful possession of ammunition.

  2. On 7 November 2016, Judge KBF Saunders sentenced Mr Hardy to 14 years and three months’ imprisonment on the charge of manufacturing methamphetamine.[1]  She imposed concurrent sentences of imprisonment on the other two charges.[2]  The Judge also made an order under s 86 of the Sentencing Act 2002 requiring Mr Hardy to serve 50 per cent of the sentence before being eligible to apply for parole.[3] 

    [1]R v Hardy [2016] NZDC 21979 at [24].

    [2]At [24].

    [3]At [25].

  3. Mr Hardy appeals against sentence on the basis that the Judge erred in making the factual findings that underpinned the sentence she imposed.

  4. The appeal was filed out of time.  Mr Hardy provided a reasonable explanation for this.  The Crown did not oppose.  We grant an extension of time to appeal accordingly.

  5. Mr Hardy originally appealed against both conviction and sentence.  During the hearing Mr Ewen confirmed on Mr Hardy’s behalf that the appeal against conviction was abandoned.  We dismiss it accordingly.

Background

  1. The Crown case was that Mr Hardy was the primary figure in a significant methamphetamine manufacturing operation between late 2012 and 18 June 2013.  The Crown relied on text messages sent and received by Mr Hardy during this period to demonstrate the nature and extent of this activity.  In addition, the Crown relied on items that the police found when they searched several properties in the Hamilton area on 18 June 2013. 

  2. On that date, the police searched a semi-industrial property situated in Collins Road on the outskirts of Hamilton.  When they entered the property, they found Mr Hardy’s flatmate, Mr Brent Young, manufacturing methamphetamine in a concealed room on the upper floor of the property.  The police also discovered more than 300 grams of packaged methamphetamine on the property.  In addition, they found a handwritten list of equipment required for manufacturing methamphetamine.  Items on the list included a clamp stand, funnels, a frying pan, a pressure cooker seal, and a beaker.  Mr Hardy admitted writing this list, although he said he had done so at Mr Young’s direction.  The police also located Mr Hardy’s palm print on a chest freezer in the property that was found to contain methamphetamine.

  3. A person by…

Continue reading Hardy v The Queen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Hardy v The Queen [2017] NZCA 327
Case
[2017] NZCA 327
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Campbell Murray Hardy appeals against the sentence imposed upon him by the District Court at Hamilton, arguing that the sentencing judge erred in principle in relying on certain factual findings to determine the sentence. The appeal against conviction was abandoned during the hearing of the appeal. The court found that the sentencing judge was entitled to make the factual findings that she did, and that those findings justified the sentence imposed. The appeal against sentence is therefore dismissed. The application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.