R v Askin - [2012] NZHC 1861

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NELSON REGISTRY

CRI-2012-042-192 [2012] NZHC 1861

THE QUEEN

v

DANIEL ALEXANDER ASKIN

Hearing: 30 July 2012

Counsel: J M Webber for Crown
M G Dollimore for Accused

Sentencing: 30 July 2012

SENTENCING NOTES OF MACKENZIE J

[1] Daniel Alexander Askin you appear for sentence on one count of possession of cannabis for sale and two counts of unlawful possession of firearms and explosives. The count of possession, as laid, was a count of possession for supply. Counsel for the Crown seeks leave to amend that to one of possession of cannabis for sale and that is not opposed and I sentence you on that basis.

[2] You are here in the High Court for sentencing because the District Court has declined jurisdiction to sentence you. The circumstances are that on 27 April 2012 you were visiting the home of an associate and were unfortunate enough to be there at the time when police came to execute a search warrant at that address. Your vehicle was searched in the course of that and police located two one ounce cannabis head deal bags in your car and also a large quantity of ammunition. As a result of
that a search warrant was executed at your home address in Reefton. In the rafters of

R V ASKIN HC NEL CRI-2012-042-192 [30 July 2012]

the garage police located a total of 34 deal bags each containing approximately one ounce of high grade cannabis head material, some cannabis leaf material, packets of snap lock bags and in another part of the garage they located two small plastic bags of cannabis seeds, a set of hand held scales and some rifle ammunition. In a bedroom police discovered four rifles, a .22 magnum rifle, a .270 rifle, a
.357 magnum rifle and a 12 gauge single shotgun with a cut down stock minus the barrel, and further ammunition was found. Further cannabis was also located in the house. In total you had 1.328kgs of high grade dried cannabis head, and 52gms of dried cannabis leaf.

[3] You said in explanation to police that you had grown the cannabis to sell it. You have since said that you found a cannabis plantation which you harvested. Whatever the rights and wrongs of that may be, it is clear that you did seek to benefit from the sale of that cannabis crop. The firearms you say were used for hunting.

[4] I turn now to your personal circumstances. You are 21 years old and live with your partner and three year old son. You have a supportive family and I have letters from both your partner and your parents who are strongly supportive of you. You left school at 15 years with no formal qualifications and your education was handicapped by a learning disability. But you have since leaving school been in full employment and are currently in employment. I have references from your employer, and from others, who indicate that you are…

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 Askin

Details

AGLC: R v Askin [2012] NZHC 1861
Case: [2012] NZHC 1861
Decision Date: 30 July 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Daniel Alexander Askin was sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand, Nelson Registry, on charges of possession of cannabis for sale, and unlawful possession of firearms and explosives. During a police search, officers found cannabis and ammunition in Askin's vehicle, leading to a further search of his home where more cannabis and firearms were found. Askin admitted to growing cannabis for sale and claimed the firearms were for hunting. The court considered Askin's personal circumstances, including his employment history and support from family, and assessed his risk of reoffending as low.

The court had to determine the appropriate starting point for sentencing, considering the nature of the offences and Askin's personal circumstances. The court adopted a starting point of two and a half years for the cannabis offences, uplifted by six months due to the firearms charges, resulting in a total starting point of three years. The court also considered mitigating factors such as Askin's age, lack of previous convictions, and good character, reducing the sentence by four months for age and character, and by eight months for his early guilty plea.

Ultimately, the court decided on a sentence of home detention for twelve months, starting on 1 August 2012. This decision was based on the belief that a non-custodial sentence would better serve the purposes of rehabilitation and deterrence, despite the offences occurring at Askin's home. The court also ordered the destruction of the cannabis, materials, firearms, and ammunition, and set standard post-release conditions for six months. The bail conditions were adjusted to reflect the commencement date of the home detention sentence.

Orders