R v Collins - [2012] NZHC 2850

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2012-092-006537

CRI-2012-092-003400 [2012] NZHC 2850

THE QUEEN

v

UPUMONI COLLINS

Charges: Selling cannabis x 1
Possession of cannabis for supply x1; Injuring with intent to injure x1

Plea: Guilty

Appearances: D M Robinson for Crown
H Retzlaff for Prisoner

Sentenced: 30 October 2012
Selling cannabis and possession of cannabis for supply –
1 year, 8 months’ imprisonment on each (concurrent)
Assault with intent to injure – 1 year, six months; imprisonment
(cumulative on other sentences).
Total: 3 years, two months’ imprisonment
SENTENCING NOTES OF VENNING J

Solicitors: Crown Solicitor, Auckland
Copy to: H Retzlaff, Public Defence Service, Manukau

R V COLLINS HC AK CRI-2012-092-006537 [30 October 2012]

[1] Upumoni Collins, you are for sentence having pleaded guilty to one count of selling cannabis, one count of possession of cannabis for supply and one count of injuring with intent to injure. The cannabis charges each carry a maximum term of eight years’ imprisonment. The charge of injuring with intent to injure carries a maximum term of five years’ imprisonment. You are for sentence in this Court because the District Court declined jurisdiction.

[2] Just before midday on 8 March this year the police searched your home. They found 26 cannabis tinnies in a container on the washing machine. They found
$6,092 cash on you. You admitted ownership of the tinnies and accepted the cash was from the sale of cannabis. You said you had been selling cannabis since December 2011. While the police were at your address carrying out the search approximately 15 members of the public arrived within one and a half hours to buy cannabis from you. On 10 May 2012, while on bail, you assaulted your former partner. The pair of you had been drinking during the day. At about half past seven that night she went to a neighbour’s house. A short time later you arrived at the address. You were angry and yelling abuse at her. She ran to the bathroom and locked the door behind her. You chased her and kicked the door down. You broke it off its hinges. You then went into the bathroom and punched her several times to her head. She fell to the floor and as she was lying on the floor you kicked her several times to the head. You then left the address. As a result of your assault on her the victim suffered a fractured eye socket and serious bruising to her face.

[3] The pre-sentence report records you have no previous convictions for drug related offending and you have not previously been convicted of any assaults or any violent offending.

[4] However, as I have noted it is of some concern the report suggests you have sought to minimise your culpability, particularly in relation to the violent attack on your former partner. You have suggested you would benefit from anger management programmes to help you deal with provocation from others. I note you go on to say…

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 Collins

Details

AGLC: R v Collins [2012] NZHC 2850
Case: [2012] NZHC 2850
Decision Date: 30 October 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The High Court of New Zealand considered the case of Upumoni Collins, who pleaded guilty to selling and possessing cannabis for supply, and injuring with intent to injure. The court needed to determine an appropriate sentence, taking into account the purposes and principles of the Sentencing Act, the defendant’s culpability, and the seriousness of the offences. The court heard that Collins had been operating a small-scale cannabis business and had assaulted his former partner, causing her significant injuries. The Crown recommended a starting point of five and a half years in total, while defence counsel suggested a starting point between three and a half to three years, ten months. The court decided that the drug offences and the assault were sufficiently different to warrant cumulative sentencing. The court considered the defendant’s remorse and rehabilitation efforts, ultimately deciding to reduce the sentence by three months for these factors and by 25 per cent for the guilty plea. The total sentence was set at three years, two months in prison, with the sentences for the drug offences to run concurrently and the sentence for the assault to run cumulatively.

The court determined the starting point for the cannabis offences to be two years, eight months, considering the commercial nature of the operation and the amount of cash found on Collins. For the assault, the court set a starting point of two years, four months, taking into account the violence used and the fact that the assault occurred while Collins was on bail for the drug offences. The court then adjusted the cumulative starting point to four years, six months, considering the totality principle. Collins was sentenced to one year, eight months in prison for the drug offences, to run concurrently, and one year, six months for the assault, to run cumulatively, resulting in a total sentence of three years, two months. Additionally, the court ordered the forfeiture of $6,092 found at Collins’ property.

Orders