Porter v The King - [2024] NZHC 1955

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2024-463-62

[2024] NZHC 1955

DARIUS MARVIN PORTER

v

THE KING

Hearing: 11 July 2024

Appearances:

W Nabney for Appellant P Patanasiri for Crown

Judgment:

16 July 2024

JUDGMENT OF MUIR J

Sentence Appeal

This judgment was delivered by me on 16 July 2024 at 3.00 pm,

………………………………… Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:

Crown Law Office, Wellington

PORTER v R [2024] NZHC 1955 [16 July 2024]

Introduction

[1] Mr Porter appeals his sentence handed down by Judge A J S Snell at the Rotorua District Court on 3 May 2024.1

[2] Mr Porter was sentenced to seven years and four months’ imprisonment in respect of charges of;

(a)dangerous driving;

(b)unlawfully taking a motor vehicle;

(c)possessing methamphetamine for supply; and

(d)failing to comply with a prohibition.

[3] Mr Porter appeals the sentence as manifestly excessive on the following grounds:

(a)The starting point was too high — the Court did not have sufficient regard to the limited role Mr Porter played in the offending.

(b)A full discount of 25 per cent for his guilty plea should have been allowed.

Summary of facts

[4] The following summary of facts is based on the facts on which the sentencing Judge sentenced Mr Porter.

Possession of methamphetamine for supply and failing to comply with a prohibition

[5] In the early morning of 12 August 2023 Mr Porter was driving a motor vehicle on State Highway 1. He had been earlier forbidden to drive by the police in July 2023. Mr Porter crashed his motor vehicle and police arrested Mr Porter shortly afterwards

1 R v Porter [2024] NZDC 9843.

at the scene. Pursuant to the arrest, Mr Porter was found to have 2.56 grams of methamphetamine, a thermal optic sight, a set of electronic scales, $2,055 in cash and two mobile phones.

[6] As a result of police locating the methamphetamine, scales and cash, the police conducted a search of Mr Porter’s motel room. They located just over one kilogram of methamphetamine hidden in a wardrobe. There was also a third mobile phone and a $5 note to be used as a token with a methamphetamine exchange.

[7] The police identified a secure messaging application called Threema on Mr Porter’s mobile phone which revealed that he and other associates had been arranging with a person in Tūrangi to pick up the kilogram of methamphetamine. The $5 note was to be taken as a token to confirm the transaction. There were other conversations disclosed that revealed a joint methamphetamine enterprise that Mr Porter appeared to be involved with.

[8]In total, Mr Porter was located with 1006.76 grams of methamphetamine and

$2,055 in cash.

Dangerous driving

[9] Mr Porter was located driving a motor vehicle in Palmerston North on 13 July exceeding the speed limit, driving on the wrong side of the road towards incoming traffic, driving at speed through a roundabout and then crashing into the rear of the victim’s motor…

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 Porter v The King

Details

AGLC: Porter v The King [2024] NZHC 1955
Case: [2024] NZHC 1955
Decision Date: 16 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Darius Marvin Porter appeals the sentence handed down by Judge A J S Snell at the Rotorua District Court. Porter was sentenced to seven years and four months’ imprisonment for charges including dangerous driving, unlawfully taking a motor vehicle, possessing methamphetamine for supply, and failing to comply with a prohibition. The appellant argues that the starting point for his sentence was too high and that a full 25 per cent discount for his guilty plea should have been allowed.

The court was required to decide whether the starting point for Porter's sentence was appropriate and whether a full 25 per cent discount for his guilty plea should have been applied. The appeal hinged on whether there was a material error in the sentence that warranted a different sentence to be imposed.

The court found that while Porter's role in the offending was less significant than that of others, he was not merely a courier but was integral to the transaction. The court concluded that the starting point of 10 years was stern but not inappropriate. Regarding the discount for the guilty plea, the court noted that while the plea was not entered at the earliest opportunity, there were explicable reasons for the delay, and the strength of the prosecution case justified a 20 per cent discount. The court found no error in the sentence and dismissed the appeal.

Orders