R v Bancroft

[2015] NZHC 949

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2012-004-18344 [2015] NZHC 949

THE QUEEN

v

PHILLIP BANCROFT

Charge:

Plea:

Supplying methamphetamine

Not Guilty

Counsel:

B D Tantrum for Crown
M J Dyhrberg QC for Prisoner

Resentenced:

7 May 2015

SENTENCING NOTES OF BREWER J

Solicitors/Counsel:          Meredith Connell (Auckland) for Crown

Marie Dyhrberg QC (Auckland) for Prisoner

R v BANCROFT [2015] NZHC 949 [7 May 2015]

Introduction

[1]      Mr Bancroft, you are here, of course, for resentencing following a decision of the Court of Appeal.1    In accordance with the direction of the Court of Appeal, I quash  the  sentence  of  three-and-a-half  years’ imprisonment  and  I  now  look  to resentence you on the basis that the quantity of methamphetamine you supplied was half a gram and not 14 grams, or half an ounce.

Starting point

[2]      The case law, as Ms Dyhrberg QC and Mr Tantrum have submitted to me, is to the effect that a starting point of two years’ imprisonment is the proper starting point.2   That reflects the commerciality of the supply.  I, therefore, adopt a starting point of two years’ imprisonment.

Personal circumstances

[3]      As before, I will not increase the starting point to take account of your record of offending.   But I must impose an uplift to reflect the fact you committed this offending while serving a sentence of community detention.

[4]      Ms Dyhrberg suggested that an uplift of three months would be justified, but I considered that submission the last time you were before me and reached the view that I should adopt an uplift of six months’ imprisonment.  I stick to that view.

[5]      Perhaps a person presenting to the Court as a second-time offender might be able to argue for an exceptionally merciful uplift of three months.  But your record of offending is somewhat longer than that and so although I am not going to penalise you for that previous record of offending, it does take away my ability to reduce the

uplift for your offending while on community detention.

1      Bancroft v R [2015] NZCA 140.

2      Cases considered for this sentencing are: R v Fatu CA415/04, 13 April 2005; R v Hughes [2007] NZCA 73; R v Matiaha-Smith HC Wellington CRI-2008-035-1764, 27 March 2009; R v Vinod HC Auckland CRI-2007-004-010097, 3 June 2008; Lundy v R [2013] NZCA 106; R v Tohu HC Whangarei CRI-2010-088-2691, 7 October 2010; R v Matthews HC Whangarei CRI-2010-088-

002613, 13 April 2011.

Sentence

[6]      The end sentence is one of two years and six months’ imprisonment, and I

impose that accordingly. You may stand down.

Brewer J