R v Eggleton

[2018] NZHC 3375

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CRI-2017-063-3068

[2018] NZHC 3375

THE QUEEN

v

MONIQUE JANE EGGLETON

Counsel:	L Dunn for Crown S Tait for Defendant
Sentencing:	18 December 2018
Charge:	Possession of methamphetamine
Plea:	Guilty

SENTENCING NOTES OF BREWER J

Solicitors:

Almao Douch (Hamilton) for Crown

R v EGGLETON [2018] NZHC 3375 [18 December 2018]

Introduction

[1]                   Ms Eggleton, unfortunately you have sat and listened to too many Judges talking about your activity and eventually imposing a sentence on you. I have to do this afresh for the charge to which you have pleaded guilty, being one of possession of methamphetamine for supply.1 It is time you got your life in better order than it is because otherwise you will continue to be sitting in a dock, having Judges sending you to prison, and that is just a self-destructive way to live your life.

[2]                   You only face the charge of possession of methamphetamine for supply because the Crown does not intend to proceed on the charge of wilfully attempting to obstruct the course of justice and the other charge of possession of methamphetamine. Ms Dunn has just told me the Crown will not be offering evidence on those charges and accordingly I dismiss them.

The offending

[3]                   The facts, in brief, are that late on the night of 24 August 2017, you were at an address in Kaingaroa with a number of associates. The Police came to the address to arrest one of your associates. They found a white laundry basket. In it was a diary in which you recorded details of methamphetamine sales. Also in the basket were quantities of cash and a jacket. In the pocket of the jacket was a zip-lock bag containing methamphetamine. The Police also found your handbag in the basket. The handbag contained more cash and methamphetamine.

[4]In total, $9,045 in cash and 1.1 grams of methamphetamine were found.

Starting point

[5]                   There is a case called R v Fatu which sets out sentencing bands depending on the amount of methamphetamine involved.2 The Crown says your offending falls at the bottom of band one of that case. Band one is for low level supply (of less than five

1      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(f).

2      R v Fatu [2006] 2 NZLR 72 (CA).

grams) and has a sentencing range of two to four years imprisonment.3 The Crown seeks a starting point at the very bottom of band one: two years’ imprisonment.

[6]                   Your counsel, Mr Tait, agrees with the Crown’s assessment. So do I. The amount of methamphetamine involved is small. The level of commercial sophistication is low. If there had not been the evidence of the cash and the diary, I expect you would have faced the lesser charge of mere possession. The amount of methamphetamine found in your possession is far below that deemed to be for the purposes of supply, which is five grams.4

[7]I therefore adopt a starting point of two years’ imprisonment.

[8]I now have to see how I should adjust the starting point.

Personal factors

Aggravating factors

[9]                   At the time of the offending you were subject to a sentence of supervision imposed by the Taupo District Court on 4 July 2017. You were only six weeks into this sentence when you offended.

[10]You also have a number of recent methamphetamine-related convictions:

(a)2012 – one charge of possession of methamphetamine;

(b)2013 – one charge of possession of methamphetamine for supply, two charges of conspiracy to deal in methamphetamine and three charges of supplying methamphetamine; and

(c)2017 – one charge of possession of methamphetamine and one charge of possession of utensils for methamphetamine.

3 At [34].

4      Sections 6(6) and 2(1A); see also schp 5.

[11]               The Crown seeks an uplift of 12 months to reflect your previous convictions. Mr Tait submits a six-month uplift is adequate, in addition to a three-month uplift for the fact you offended while subject to a sentence of supervision.

[12]               Your history of methamphetamine-related offending is particularly worrying. But I consider an uplift of 12 months  to be out of proportion.   It would represent   50 percent of the starting point I have arrived at. I consider an uplift of six months, or 25 percent, is more appropriate. I also agree with Mr Tait you should receive an uplift of three months for offending while subject to supervision.

Remorse

[13]               Mr Tait raises remorse and has this morning explained the comments made in the pre-sentence report. He has provided me with a letter written by you in which you express insight into the causes of your offending. Mr Tait has also provided me with a letter of support from your mother and an offer of employment from a small road transport company. These are promising signs. However, when it comes to remorse as a separate factor deserving a separate discount, the law is clear that what is required is something that goes materially beyond the expressions natural for a person who is going to be sentenced. I think there is not, in this case, indication of the sort of remorse that would receive a separate discount.5

Guilty plea

[14]               You pleaded guilty on 15 October 2018. Mr Tait acknowledges this was late in the piece. But he says your guilty plea was entered at the first reasonable opportunity after discussions were held with the Crown where they agreed to withdraw the other charges against you. The Crown says these discussions began in September.

[15]               Mr Tait seeks a discount of 15 percent. The Crown says this is within range, suggesting discount of between 10 and 15 percent.

[16]               In the circumstances, particularly the late entry of your plea, I am prepared to give you a discount of 10 percent.

5      Hessell v R [2010] NZSC 135, [2011] 1 NZLR 607 at [64].

Time spent on EM bail

[17]               Finally, there is the matter of your time on EM bail. I am a bit confused as to how much of that time was spent on EM bail in relation to this case and how much was spent on EM bail in relation to other charges.

[18]               I also consider that with your record, you were quite fortunate to have EM bail. But, nevertheless, I am prepared to give you a discount because you were subject to the restrictions that EM bail poses for at least some months. The discount will be two months.

Sentence

[19]               Ms Eggleton, on the charge of possessing methamphetamine for supply, I sentence you to two years and four months’ imprisonment.

[20]You may stand down.

Brewer J