R v Arama - [2023] NZHC 953

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE

CRI-2021-088-2754

[2023] NZHC 953

THE KING

v

ITI STRICKLAND ARAMA

Hearing: 4 April 2023

Appearances:

R Annandale for the Crown W McKean for Mr Arama

Sentence:

4 April 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF ROBINSON J

Solicitors/counsel: MWIS, Whangarei WRMK, Whangarei

R v ARAMA [2023] NZHC 953 [4 April 2023]

Introduction

[1] Good morning, Mr Arama, you appear before the Court today for sentence having pleaded guilty to participating in an organised criminal group.1

Outline

[2] I will begin by briefly setting out the factual basis on which I am going to pass sentence today and I will do that by referring to the summary of facts which you accepted when you entered your guilty plea. You of course know what that says and so do I, but it is important that we do this in public and that people know what you’re pleading guilty to.

[3] I will then explain the way in which I am going to determine your sentence and the process I have adopted for that and why. I will take into account your personal circumstances which might explain any increase or reductions to a starting point which I am going to set as you have heard from my discussion with the lawyers.

Offending

[4] In terms of your offending Mr Arama, your conviction is the result of Operation Freya, a joint Police and Customs investigation which commenced in March 2021 that focused on your group’s activities. Operation Freya revealed a significant drug operation in the Northland region, mostly of methamphetamine but occasionally in other class B controlled drugs as well.

[5] It appears that Kauri Kerr spearheaded these operations and he of course is your daughter’s partner. She was also involved in the group. The summary of facts records that the total amount of drugs that Customs intercepted that are attributed to this group are 20 kilograms of methamphetamine, 5.4 kilograms of MDMA and one kilogram of pseudoephedrine.

1 Crimes Act 1961, s 98A. Maximum penalty 10 years’ imprisonment.

[6] As to your role in the group Mr Arama, you and your extended whānau live at a property on Rawhiti Road. Kauri Kerr and your daughter and their family were living at the property next door.

[7] Although you were not actively involved in procuring or manufacturing drugs with the group, you did allow your property to be used to collect deliveries and importations of controlled drugs on behalf of the group. Packages intercepted by Customs that were addressed to your property between 30 June 2020 and 6 April 2021 contained 1.3 kilograms of methamphetamine, 4.4 kilograms of MDMA and one kilogram of pseudoephedrine.

[8] It appears that you were in charge of a significant amount of money for your daughter and Kauri Kerr. On one occasion as you have heard us discuss, on 28 October 2021, your daughter called you asking to get some cash for her to collect.…

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 R v Arama

Details

AGLC: R v Arama [2023] NZHC 953
Case: [2023] NZHC 953
Decision Date: 4 April 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Arama involved Iti Strickland Arama, who was convicted of participating in an organised criminal group, an offence under section 98A of the Crimes Act 1961, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment. The case was heard by Robinson J in the High Court of New Zealand at Whangarei, with appearances by R Annandale for the Crown and W McKean for Mr Arama. The sentencing occurred on 4 April 2023.

The central legal issue was determining the appropriate sentence for Mr Arama, taking into account his role in the organised criminal group, the scale of the offending, and his personal circumstances. The court needed to establish a starting point for the sentence, which would be adjusted based on aggravating and mitigating factors, and then consider any discounts for personal circumstances and his guilty plea.

In determining the sentence, Robinson J outlined the two-stage sentencing process, beginning with setting a starting point for the offence. Considering the nature and scale of the offending, the court set a starting point of three years' imprisonment. The judge took into account Mr Arama's role in the group, including allowing his property to be used for drug deliveries, handling large sums of money, and operating his own drug-dealing business. The judge then applied various discounts to this starting point based on Mr Arama's personal circumstances, including his guilty plea, remorse, pre-sentence and cultural reports, and the time he had spent on electronic monitoring bail. After applying a total discount of 47.5%, the effective sentence was reduced to 19 months' imprisonment, which qualified for home detention. The court imposed a sentence of ten months' home detention, with post-detention conditions for six months.

In summary, the court sentenced Mr Arama to ten months' home detention for his role in participating in an organised criminal group, reflecting the seriousness of the offending and his personal circumstances, while considering the purposes and principles of sentencing.

Orders