Hewitson v The King - [2025] NZHC 3374

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CRI-2025-485-000061

[2025] NZHC 3374

BETWEEN
ROWAN DAVID HARRIE HEWITSON

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing: 29 October 2025

Counsel:

M J Dyhrberg KC and J N Olsen for Appellant N L Jamieson for Respondent

Judgment:

7 November 2025

JUDGMENT OF LA HOOD J

(Appeal against sentence)

[1] Mr Hewitson appeals his sentence of 10 months’ home detention and 200 hours’ community work,1 after entering guilty pleas, following a sentence indication,2 to charges of importing ketamine3 and MDMA,4 supplying5 and offering to supply LSD,6 possessing MDMA for supply7 and failing to comply with a search obligation.8

[2]He appeals the sentence on the ground that it was not the least restrictive

outcome appropriate in the circumstances and that greater reductions should have

1      R v Hewitson [2025] NZDC 18005 [Decision under appeal].
2      R v Hewitson DC Wellington CRI-2023-085-2821, 11 April 2025.
3      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(a) and (2)(c); maximum penalty eight years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 6(1)(a) and (2)(c); maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.
5      Section 6(1)(c) and (2)(a); maximum penalty life imprisonment.
6      Section 6(1)(c) and (2)(a); maximum penalty life imprisonment.
7      Section 6(1)(f) and (2)(a); maximum penalty 14 years’ imprisonment.
8      Search and Surveillance Act 2012, s 178 maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment.

HEWITSON v R [2025] NZHC 3374 [7 November 2025]

been made for personal mitigating factors. He seeks a sentence of a combination of community detention, community work and intensive supervision.

The offending

[3]I gratefully adopt the sentencing Judge’s summary of the offending:9

[4] At the time of this offending, you were aged between 18 and 19 years old.

[5] You were living between your parent’s addresses in Wilton and Waikanae.

[6] In relation to the ketamine offending between June 2022 and November 2023 you imported 37 packages containing the class C controlled drug ketamine through the postal system. The total amount of ketamine imported was 13.603 kilograms.

[7] Twenty of the 37 packages containing ketamine were intercepted by police or Customs. Each package contained between 252 to 510 grams of ketamine.

[8] Following the seizure of these packages police and Customs conducted a review of similar consignments and identified a further 16 importations of ketamine by you.

[9] These 16 importations were linked to you either by the same or similar consigner details including country of origin United Kingdom, product declaration, weight and value, as well as consignee details including names and addresses that were in close proximity to your home address. The quantities of ketamine contained in these non-intercepted packages were between 100 and 500 grams.

[10] It is estimated that if you sold the ketamine by the gram the total value of the 13.603 kilograms of ketamine imported was between approximately
$2.2 million and $5.8 million. If sold in ounce quantities the total value was between approximately $480,000 and $2.5 million.

[11] In relation to the importing of MDMA on or about 23 March…

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 Hewitson v The King

Details

AGLC: Hewitson v The King [2025] NZHC 3374
Case: [2025] NZHC 3374
Decision Date: 7 November 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Rowan David Harrie Hewitson appeals his sentence of 10 months’ home detention and 200 hours’ community work, following his guilty pleas to charges including importing ketamine and MDMA, supplying and offering to supply LSD, possessing MDMA for supply, and failing to comply with a search obligation. He argues that the sentence was not the least restrictive outcome appropriate in the circumstances and that greater reductions should have been made for personal mitigating factors. He seeks a sentence of a combination of community detention, community work, and intensive supervision.

The court considered whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and whether the sentence of home detention was outside the range of available sentencing options. The court noted that the starting point for the offending was at the upper end of the available range and that the overall reduction of 40 per cent for personal mitigating factors was generous, especially given the seriousness of the offending. The court found that it was open to the Judge to conclude that a sentence of home detention was the least restrictive outcome appropriate in the circumstances.

The appeal was dismissed.

Orders