Henderson v R

Wiremu Henderson appeals his conviction for possession of methamphetamine for supply and possession of a psychoactive substance known as N-BOMe for supply. John Henderson appeals his sentence of eight and a half years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed both appeals. The Court held that Wiremu’s conviction for possession of methamphetamine for supply was properly based on evidence that he was the person seen by police dropping a bag of methamphetamine from a bedroom window. Wiremu’s counsel argued the evidence was unsafe and a formal identification procedure should have been followed, but the Court held that the evidence was more properly classified as resemblance evidence rather than visual identification evidence. In any event, the Court held that there was ample evidence on which the jury could be satisfied Wiremu was the man at the window. The Court also held that Wiremu’s conviction for possession of N-BOMe for supply was properly based on text messages found on a phone in the bedroom which Wiremu shared with his girlfriend. The Court held that the text messages were not hearsay because they were implied or unintended assertions and the probative value of the texts was not dependent on the truth of their contents. The Court held that John’s appeal against sentence must also be dismissed. John argued that his sentence should have been reduced by at least two years because of the imminent forfeiture of his interest in the house at Cannons Creek. The Court held that the relevant statutory provisions do not permit of any interpretation other than that they are dealing only with instrument forfeiture orders. The Court held that the forfeiture of John’s interest in the house was a civil forfeiture order and therefore did not warrant a discount in sentencing.