R v Bennett - [2013] NZHC 2708

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

CRI-2012-063-2511 [2013] NZHC 2708

THE QUEEN

v

RANDOLF TERRENCE BENNETT

Charges:

Plea:

Supplying methamphetamine (5);

Conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine ; Cultivating cannabis

Guilty

Counsel:

CH Macklin for Crown AMM Schulze for Prisoner

Sentenced:

18 October 2013

SENTENCING NOTES OF BREWER J

Solicitors: Gordon Pilditch (Rotorua) for Crown
Lance Lawson (Rotorua) for Prisoner

R v BENNETT [2013] NZHC 2708 [18 October 2013]

Introduction

[1] Mr Bennett, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty on 15 August 2013 to six methamphetamine related charges and one charge of cultivation of cannabis.

Facts

Supplying methamphetamine

[2] The first, third, fourth, fifth and sixth counts are charges of supplying methamphetamine. These counts relate to 11 separate transactions. These offences carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

[3] On three occasions you supplied methamphetamine to Ms Mihaka. Text messages were exchanged between the two of you arranging the supply. The transactions occurred on or between 27 July – 28 July, 24 August – 24 September, and on 24 November, all in 2011.

[4] On or about 19 November 2011, Ms Clark made contact with Ms Mihaka, who referred Ms Clark on to you. You then arranged, via phone and text message conversations, to supply her with methamphetamine. You went on to supply methamphetamine to Ms Clark and her ‘boy’, Mr Ford, after she made contact with you via text message on 26 November 2011. Mr Ford picked up the methamphetamine. He was intercepted on a bus after receiving the methamphetamine and searched. Methamphetamine was found in his clothing and he was arrested.

[5] On 14 August, 27 November, 7 December and 17 December 2011, you supplied methamphetamine to unknown persons. On the occasion of 27 November 2011, you arranged for your wife to pass the methamphetamine on to the buyer.

[6] On 30 November and 14 December 2011, you supplied methamphetamine to Mr Rongonui. On the latter occasion, Mr Rongonui was arrested and searched.

[7] The summary of facts to which you have pleaded guilty states that you supplied over 285 grams of methamphetamine.

Conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine

[8] You were charged along with Mr Fatu and Mr Englebretsen with one count of conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine. This charge relates to two separate time periods, namely on or between 20-28 October 2011 and 22-26 November 2011. This offence carries a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.

[9] You and Mr Englebretsen exchanged text messages from 20 October 2011 to 28 October 2011 in order to arrange the manufacture of methamphetamine. Then, between 22 to 26 November 2011, you, Mr Fatu and Mr Englebretsen exchanged text messages and had phone conversations arranging the supply and delivery of precursor substances for the manufacture of methamphetamine.

[10] On 26 November 2011, Mr Englebretsen and Mr Fatu arranged to meet at an unknown location. You then sent a text message to Mr Englebretsen asking how far away the manufacture would be. Mr Englebretsen sent a text message in response, indicating…

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 Bennett

Details

AGLC: R v Bennett [2013] NZHC 2708
Case: [2013] NZHC 2708
Decision Date: 18 October 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Bennett involves Mr Bennett, who pleaded guilty to multiple charges of supplying methamphetamine, conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine, and cultivating cannabis. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence for Mr Bennett, considering the nature and severity of his offences, his criminal history, personal circumstances, and the principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act. The court had to decide on the starting point for the sentence, whether to uplift or discount the sentence based on the totality of offending, personal circumstances, and the guilty plea.

The court commenced by setting a starting point for the lead offences, which involved supplying methamphetamine. The court considered the quantity of methamphetamine supplied and relevant case law to determine the appropriate sentencing band. The court acknowledged Mr Bennett's culpability, but also recognised mitigating factors such as his willingness to engage in rehabilitation and expressed remorse. The court uplifted the starting point to account for the conspiracy and cultivation charges, but made adjustments based on Mr Bennett's personal circumstances and guilty plea. Ultimately, the court sentenced Mr Bennett to eight years' imprisonment for supplying methamphetamine, six years for conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine, and two years for cultivating cannabis, to be served concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of eight years' imprisonment.

The final orders of the court were that Mr Bennett be sentenced to eight years' imprisonment for supplying methamphetamine, six years for conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine, and two years for cultivating cannabis, with all sentences to be served concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of eight years' imprisonment.

Orders