Ireland v Police - [2021] NZHC 3202

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE

CRI-2021-404-00380

[2021] NZHC 3202

BETWEEN
DANE CONOR IRELAND

Appellant

AND

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Respondent

Hearing: 15 November 2021

Appearances:

C C Watkins for the Appellant H J Bell for the Respondent

Judgment:

26 November 2021

JUDGMENT OF ROBINSON J

This judgment was delivered by me on Friday 26 November 2021 at 4.00 pm

Registrar/Deputy Registrar Date:…………………………

Counsel/Solicitors:
CC Watkins, Barrister, Auckland
H J Bell, Meredith Connell, Auckland

IRELAND v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2021] NZHC 3202 [26 November 2021]

Introduction

[1] Mr Ireland pleaded guilty to: one charge of possession of cannabis for supply,1 one charge of possession of cannabis,2 two charges of driving while suspended,3 and one charge of driving with excess blood alcohol (first or second offence).4. On 20 July 2021, Judge N R Dawson in the Auckland District Court, sentenced Mr Ireland to 10 months’ home detention and disqualified him from holding or obtaining a driver licence for 18 months.5

[2] Mr Ireland appeals the sentence in relation to the driving charges. His two main grounds of appeal are that:

(a)the sentence of 10 months’ home detention was manifestly excessive because the Judge should not have applied a one month uplift for the driving charges; and

(b)the 18 months’ period of disqualification was manifestly excessive because the disqualification periods should have been imposed concurrently.

The offending

[3] Mr Ireland is 25 years’ old. He has previous convictions for cannabis offending and driving while suspended.

[4] On 11 October 2019 at 8.23 pm Mr Ireland was stopped at a breath test check point. While speaking to Mr Ireland, police officers detected the smell of cannabis emanating from his car. They invoked a warrantless search of Mr Ireland’s car pursuant to the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. The subsequent search of his

1      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(f); maximum penalty eight years’ imprisonment.
2      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 7(1)(a) and (2)(b); maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $500.
3      Land Transport Act 1998, s 32(1)(c) and (3); maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $4,500, and mandatory disqualification from holding or obtaining a driver licence for six months or more.
4      Land Transport Act 1998, s 56(1); maximum penalty three months’ imprisonment or a fine not exceeding $4,500, and mandatory disqualification from holding or obtaining a driver licence for six months or more.
5      Police v Ireland [2021] NZDC 14512

vehicle uncovered 802 grams of cannabis and $6,650 in cash. This gave rise to the charge of possession of cannabis for supply. As set out below, Judge Davison treated this as the lead charge for sentencing purposes.

[5] On 17 April 2020 Mr Ireland was stopped by the police and suspended from driving for three months (until 16 July 2020) for having accrued excess demerit points. During this suspension period the Police stopped Mr Ireland twice while he was driving, once…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Ireland v Police and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] NZHC 3202
Decision Date: 26 November 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Dane Conor Ireland appealed against his sentence imposed by the Auckland District Court, challenging both the length of his home detention and the period for which he was disqualified from holding or obtaining a driver's licence. Ireland had pleaded guilty to possession of cannabis for supply, possession of cannabis, two charges of driving while suspended, and one charge of driving with excess blood alcohol. The District Court sentenced Ireland to 10 months' home detention and disqualified him from holding or obtaining a driver's licence for 18 months. Ireland argued that the sentence of 10 months' home detention was manifestly excessive because the judge should not have applied a one month uplift for the driving charges, and that the 18 months' period of disqualification was manifestly excessive because the disqualification periods should have been imposed concurrently.

The court considered the arguments and concluded that while one month's home detention for a first and stand-alone charge of driving with excess breath alcohol would be manifestly excessive, the end sentence of 10 months' home detention was well within the available range taking into account the totality of Ireland's offending and his personal circumstances. The court also found that the disqualification period of 18 months was manifestly excessive in the circumstances. A period of 10 months' disqualification from driving would be more appropriate.

As a result, the appeal was allowed in respect of the length of disqualification only. The period of disqualification of 18 months was quashed and a period of 10 months' disqualification was imposed in lieu.

Orders