R v Corless - [2014] NZHC 1211

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2009-090-2181 [2014] NZHC 1211

THE QUEEN

v

SCOTT JAMES CORLESS

Appearances:
M Walker for the Crown

B Sellars for the Prisoner

Sentence:

30 May 2014

SENTENCING NOTES OF ELLIS J

Counsel/Solicitors:
M Walker, Meredith Connell, Auckland
B Sellars, Barrister, Auckland

R v CORLESS [2014] NZHC 1211 [30 May 2014]

[1] Mr Corless you are for sentence today, having pleaded guilty to two groups of methamphetamine related offences committed over a 2 year period between April
2008 and May 2010. The charges were the result of three searches by the Police, one of a property in Te Atatu and two of your home in Titirangi.

[2] Before turning to the matter of your sentence, though, it is necessary I think to put on record why it is taken quite so long to get to this point.

[3] Following the search of the Te Atatu property on 2 February 2009 you were arrested but then bailed to your home address at Otitori Bay Rd. You were arrested again after the first search of that property on 29 April 2009. You were bailed to that address again. The third search occurred on 7 May 2010 and you were again arrested. You have been in custody since then.

[4] On 11 October 2010 you pleaded guilty to 5 charges arising out of the second search, namely:

(a) one count of possessing precursor equipment;1

(b) one count of possessing a class C drug, namely 542 tablets of BZP

and TFMPP, for supply;2

(c) one count of unlawful possession of a .22 rifle;3

(d) one count of unlawful possession of a pump action shotgun;4

(e) one count of unlawful possession of ammunition;5

[5] Before your trial on the second group of charges was scheduled to commence on 20 September 2011, you sought to challenge the admissibility of the evidence
obtained as a result of the Te Atatu search. That challenge was dismissed by the

1      29 April 2009.
2      29 April 2009.
3      29 April 2009.
4      29 April 2009.
5      29 April 2009.

District Court on 15 June 2011 and your appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 30 August 2011. In the event the trial scheduled for September was adjourned to May the following year.

[6] Then, after reaching an agreement with the Crown that 15 of the second group of charges would not be pursued on the morning your trial was scheduled to commence, that is 29 May 2012, you pleaded guilty to:

(a) One count of possessing 25.8 grams of methamphetamine for supply6; (b) Two counts of manufacturing methamphetamine7;
(c) One count of receiving stolen property (four Apple Macbook computers valued at $2400 each)8;

(d) One count of possessing methamphetamine9;

(e) One count of unlawful possession of a 357 magnum revolver10;

(f) One count of unlawful possession of a Russian semi-automatic sniper rifle11;

(g) One count of unlawful possession of a high powered air rifle12; (h) One count of unlawful possession…

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 Corless

Details

AGLC: R v Corless [2014] NZHC 1211
Case: [2014] NZHC 1211
Decision Date: 30 May 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Corless was heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, with the defendant, Scott James Corless, appearing for sentencing after pleading guilty to multiple methamphetamine-related offences committed between April 2008 and May 2010. The offences stemmed from three separate police searches, two of Corless's home and one of a property in Te Atatu. The legal issues before the court included determining the appropriate starting point for the sentence, considering factors both aggravating and mitigating the defendant's actions, and addressing the Crown's application for instrument forfeiture of Corless's property. The court also had to decide on the discount for Corless's guilty pleas and whether to impose a minimum term of imprisonment.

The court, in its reasoning, first established the facts of Corless's offending, which involved manufacturing large quantities of methamphetamine, possessing precursor equipment, and unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. The court dismissed Corless's challenges to the admissibility of the evidence obtained from the Te Atatu search and accepted the Crown's argument that Corless had manufactured over 500 grams of methamphetamine. The court set a starting point of 14 years imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness of the offences and the need for deterrence. It adjusted this starting point upwards to 17 years to account for factors such as Corless's offending while on bail and the presence of firearms and ammunition at his property. Mitigating factors, including Corless's health issues and his remorse, resulted in a reduction of 9 months from the starting point. The court also granted a 3½ year discount for Corless's guilty pleas and ordered a minimum term of six years imprisonment on the manufacturing charges to ensure principles of deterrence and denunciation were met. Finally, the court ordered the forfeiture of Corless's half share in his property, valued at $400,000, and the destruction of the seized firearms, ammunition, and drug items.

In summary, the court sentenced Corless to 11 years imprisonment on multiple charges, with concurrent sentences totaling 11 years. Corless was also ordered to serve a minimum term of six years before being eligible for parole, and his half share in his property was forfeited to the Crown. The firearms, ammunition, and drug items seized were ordered to be destroyed.

Orders