Higgins v The Queen - [2010] NZCA 365

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
CA54/2010
[2010] NZCA 365
BETWEENJAYDE WILLIAM CHARLES HIGGINS

Appellant

ANDTHE QUEEN

Respondent

Hearing:10 August 2010

Court:Chambers, Rodney Hansen and Heath JJ
Counsel:W N Dollimore for Appellant

M D Downs for Respondent

Judgment:11 August 2010 at 4 pm

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appeal is dismissed.
REASONS OF THE COURT
(Given by Chambers J)
Supply of methamphetamine
[1]        On 2 April last year, police stopped Jayde Higgins, the appellant, while he was driving his car. He scarpered, but a police dog tracked him down. Police found in the car a small black satchel containing $2,740 cash, three Ziploc bags containing methamphetamine, a set of electronic scales, a glass pipe for smoking methamphetamine, and a number of small clean Ziploc bags of a type used to sell methamphetamine. Mr Higgins admitted ownership of the satchel and its contents.
[2]        Mr Higgins faced two charges. The first count was a representative count of supplying the class A controlled drug methamphetamine to others. This count was based on inferences to be drawn from the presence of the large quantity of cash, together with drug paraphernalia. Mr Higgins’s defence to this count was that he was a personal methamphetamine user, not a dealer. The cash, he asserted, came from legitimate sources.
[3]        The second count focused on the three Ziploc bags containing methamphetamine. The Crown charged that Mr Higgins was in possession of methamphetamine for the purposes of supply. Mr Higgins admitted possession but asserted the methamphetamine was for his personal use.
[4]        The jury found him guilty on both counts. Judge Spear, the trial judge, subsequently sentenced Mr Higgins to two years nine months’ imprisonment.[1]
[1]     R v Higgins DC Hamilton CRI-2009-019-1744, 20 January 2010.
[5]        Mr Higgins now appeals against his conviction on count 2. He also appeals against the sentence.
Issues on the appeal
[6]        There is only one issue on the appeal against conviction. It is: should the verdict on count 2 be set aside as unreasonable?
[7]        On the sentence appeal, the single issue is whether the sentence was too long. Mr Dollimore, for Mr Higgins, submits the sentence should have been only two years’ imprisonment.
Should the verdict on count 2 be set aside as unreasonable?
[8]        Count 2, as we have said, turned on the contents of the three Ziploc bags found. The first contained only traces of methamphetamine. No one asserts that the contents of that bag could have been supplied to anyone. The second bag contained 92 mg of methamphetamine (or, more accurately, of a methamphetamine mixture[2]). The third bag contained 316 mg. It is the methamphetamine in those two bags which the Crown submitted was available for and intended for supply.
[2]     All quantities given are of a methamphetamine mixture. The evidence was that methamphetamine sold by dealers is typically 60 per cent to 90 per cent pure.
[9]        Mr Dollimore submits that the quantities found in these two bags were so small that a verdict of…

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 Higgins v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Higgins v The Queen [2010] NZCA 365
Case: [2010] NZCA 365
Decision Date: 11 August 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Higgins v The Queen involved Jayde William Charles Higgins, who was convicted of two counts related to methamphetamine. The first count was for supplying methamphetamine, and the second count was for possession of methamphetamine with intent to supply. Higgins was found guilty on both counts by a jury and sentenced to two years and nine months' imprisonment by Judge Spear. Higgins appealed against both his conviction on the second count and the severity of his sentence. The Court of Appeal, consisting of Chambers, Rodney Hansen, and Heath JJ, heard the appeal on 10 August 2010 and delivered its judgment the next day.

The central legal issue on appeal was whether the jury's verdict on the second count, regarding possession of methamphetamine with intent to supply, was unreasonable. The appellant's counsel argued that the quantities of methamphetamine found were too small to support a conviction for intent to supply, and thus the verdict was unreasonable. However, the Court found that the quantities, when considered in context and in relation to other evidence, supported a reasonable conclusion by the jury that the methamphetamine was intended for supply. The Court further noted that the evidence presented a credible picture of Higgins dealing in methamphetamine, which aligned with the jury's verdict.

The Court also considered the appeal against the sentence. The appellant argued that the sentence should have been closer to the lower end of the guideline range. However, the Court found that the sentence, which fell within the appropriate guideline range and considered the totality of the evidence, was not excessive. The Court of Appeal dismissed both the appeal against conviction and the appeal against sentence.

The final orders of the Court of Appeal were that the appeal against the conviction on count 2 was dismissed and that the appeal against the sentence was also dismissed.

Orders