R v Cooper - [2013] NZHC 170

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND NEW PLYMOUTH REGISTRY

CRI 2012-021-363 [2013] NZHC 170

THE QUEEN

v

AARON SYDNEY COOPER

Hearing: 12 February 2013

Appearances: S A Law for Crown
T Bolstad for Cooper

Judgment: 12 February 2013

SENTENCING REMARKS OF ALLAN J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor New Plymouth
T Bolstad, New Plymouth

R V COOPER HC NWP CRI 2012-021-363 [12 February 2013]

[1] Mr Cooper, you appear for sentence this morning on four charges. There is one of possession of cannabis for supply for which the maximum penalty is eight years imprisonment, one of cultivating cannabis, for which the maximum penalty is seven years imprisonment, and charges of possession of explosives and firearms respectively, for each of which the maximum penalty is four years imprisonment. The District Court has declined jurisdiction.

Factual background

[2] On 11 April 2012, the police conducted a search at your home. There they found one large, mature cannabis plant in a glasshouse located at the rear of the property. The plant was in good condition and had a large number of mature heads on it. It weighed almost 12 kg. Inside the garage the police located a backpack containing 150 grams of dried cannabis head, a set of electronic scales with a plastic Tupperware lid used for weighing cannabis, and a large ziplock bag containing 17 smaller ziplock bags. Such small ziplock bags are commonly used for retail sales of cannabis at street level.

[3] In your bedroom the police located a ziplock bag containing two grams of cannabis head, and a coffee jar containing about one gram of loose cannabis material. Over 1000 cannabis seeds were also found.

[4] In addition, the police located a rifle bolt for a 0.22 calibre rifle, and a magazine containing four live ammunition rounds. In a snaplock bag the police found some working rifle parts including a firing pin. Further ammunition was found in the kitchen. There the police located five live rounds for a 0.22 rifle. In the garage two boxes of live 0.22 ammunition were found. One contained 21 live rounds and the other 50.

[5] Although accepting that the cannabis was yours, you denied selling any of it. You also said that the rifle itself was not held by you at your home, and that you used it only for possum hunting.

[6] This morning the court has been told that during your videotaped interview you told the police the rest of the rifle was hidden in the woods, and you retrieved it when you wanted to go shooting possums.

Personal circumstances

[7] You are 25 years old, and have been living with your brother, but recently you moved in with your mother and stepfather. You have worked fulltime as a builder for about four years and are getting towards the end of your apprenticeship. The court is told if a sentence of imprisonment results your job cannot be kept open for you.

[8] For a considerable period your lifestyle has been dominated by…

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 Cooper

Details

AGLC: R v Cooper [2013] NZHC 170
Case: [2013] NZHC 170
Decision Date: 12 February 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Cooper before the High Court of New Zealand, New Plymouth Registry, involves the sentencing of Aaron Sydney Cooper on four charges: possession of cannabis for supply, cultivating cannabis, and possession of explosives and firearms. The court had to decide the appropriate penalty for these offences, taking into account the severity of the offences, the offender's previous convictions, and the mitigating factors presented. The legal issues included determining the appropriate starting point for sentencing, the impact of the offender's previous convictions, and the effect of the late guilty plea.

The court considered the quantity of cannabis found, which was sufficient to indicate commercial activity, and the presence of firearms and ammunition, which the court deemed to be a lethal combination. The court adopted a starting point of two years imprisonment, which is at the bottom of band two of the case R v Terewi. An uplift was required to reflect the firearm paraphernalia and ammunition, which added four months to the sentence. Additionally, the offender's previous convictions warranted an uplift of three months. The court deducted 10% for the late guilty plea, resulting in a total sentence of two years four months imprisonment. The court noted the offender's efforts to address his drug problem and his genuine remorse, but ultimately decided that a term of imprisonment was necessary to deter further offending.

The court's reasoning was grounded in the principles of deterrence and denunciation, as well as the need to protect the community from the offender's activities. The court acknowledged the offender's efforts to change his lifestyle but emphasised that a sentence of imprisonment was necessary to send a strong message about the consequences of re-offending. The final orders of the court were that the offender was to serve two years four months imprisonment for the two counts of possession and cultivating cannabis, and 12 months imprisonment for each of the remaining charges, all sentences to run concurrently.

Orders