R v Dennis - [2023] NZHC 169

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA

TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE

CRI-2020-063-3188

[2023] NZHC 169

THE KING

v

JANE DENNIS

Hearing: 10 February 2023

Appearances:

C Macklin for the Crown

A Schulze for the Defendant

Sentencing:

10 February 2023

SENTENCING NOTES OF WOOLFORD J

Solicitors: Gordon Pilditch (Office of the Crown Solicitor), Rotorua Counsel: A Schulze, Barrister, Rotorua

R v DENNIS [2023] NZHC 169 [10 February 2023]

Introduction

[1] Ms Jane Dennis, you are for sentence today having pleaded guilty to manufacturing methamphetamine,1 and possessing gamma-butyrolactone (GBL), a Class B controlled drug, for supply.2

Facts

[2] The charges arise out of your participation in a criminal network that was uncovered by a Police operation codenamed “Schultz”. The network consisted of a number of individuals involved in the manufacture and supply of methamphetamine in the Rotorua area. The principal offender in the network was Mr William MacFarlane. Other members included Mr McMeeking, who played a coordinating role; Mr Andrei Kupkovic, who facilitated the importation of ephedrine; and Ms Charlotte Ward, who tracked consignments and arranged money transfers.

[3] Mr MacFarlane referred to you as his “cook”. He would supply you with ephedrine and other chemicals required to manufacture methamphetamine. He would also supply you with GBL to sell.

[4] Sentencing is to proceed on the basis of the summary of facts to which you have pleaded guilty. I will now traverse the facts of your offending.

The GBL charge

[5] On 25 August 2020, Mr MacFarlane supplied you with 3.8 litres of GBL. Mr MacFarlane noted that at $2,000 per litre, the price came to $7,600. However, he owed you $3,000, so he was prepared to accept $4,600 as payment for the GBL.

The manufacturing charge

[6] Sometime prior to 7 September 2020, Mr MacFarlane arranged for the key ingredients of methamphetamine to be transported to you in Paeroa. Between 7 and 8 September the statement of facts discloses that you either manufactured

1 Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(b) and (2)(a): maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
2 Section 6(1)(f) and (2)(b): maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.

approximately 730 grams of methamphetamine or arranged for an unknown associate to do so for you. Another associate then collected and distributed that product to the wholesalers.

Personal circumstances

[7] Ms Dennis, you are 52 years old. You have 17 previous convictions, including convictions for manufacturing methamphetamine in 2012 and 2017.

[8] According to your PAC reports you began using drugs more than 20 years ago. You amassed a large debt to gangs. Since that time, you say they have harassed and bullied you into helping them manufacture methamphetamine. You feel that you have had no choice but to comply. I note that you made similar claims in your 2017 PAC report.

[9] Despite your guilty plea, you deny actually manufacturing the methamphetamine yourself on this occasion.

[10] You have taken some steps to address your drug use, including, completing residential rehabilitation at the Grace…

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 Dennis

Details

AGLC: R v Dennis [2023] NZHC 169
Case: [2023] NZHC 169
Decision Date: 10 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Dennis involves the sentencing of Ms Jane Dennis, who pleaded guilty to manufacturing methamphetamine and possessing gamma-butyrolactone (GBL) for supply. The case was heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Rotorua Registry, with the sentencing occurring on 10 February 2023. The court was required to decide the appropriate sentence for Ms Dennis's involvement in a methamphetamine manufacturing and supply network. This required consideration of the gravity of the offending, Ms Dennis's role in the offending, and various mitigating and aggravating factors.

The court considered the starting point for the sentence based on the gravity of the offending, using the Court of Appeal's guideline judgment Zhang v R. It determined that Ms Dennis's role in the offending placed her in Zhang band four, correlating to a suggested sentencing range of between eight and 16 years' imprisonment. The court then assessed Ms Dennis's role in the offending, finding that she had a significant role but less serious than the head of the operation. The court settled on a starting point of eight years' imprisonment. The court further considered aggravating and mitigating factors. It determined that an uplift of four months was required to account for Ms Dennis's prior convictions, resulting in a revised starting point of eight years and four months' imprisonment. The court then considered mitigating factors, including Ms Dennis's guilty pleas, her background, and her rehabilitative efforts. These factors resulted in a total discount of 35 per cent, plus a further discount for time spent on electronically monitored bail.

The court decided not to impose a minimum period of imprisonment (MPI) on Ms Dennis's sentence. It found that the prison sentence it was about to impose was sufficient to hold her accountable and to deter her from further offending. The final sentence was four years and seven months' imprisonment for manufacturing methamphetamine and two years' imprisonment for possessing GBL for supply, to be served concurrently.

Orders