R v Garcia - [2024] NZHC 1862

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE

CRI-2021-009-8205

[2024] NZHC 1862

THE KING

v

ANDERSON PELAEZ GARCIA

Hearing: 10 July 2024

Appearances:

A M Harvey for Crown

S G Bailey for Defendant

Judgment:

10 July 2024

SENTENCING REMARKS OF MANDER J

Introduction

[1] Anderson Pelaez Garcia, you are for sentence this morning having pleaded guilty to a representative charge of importing the Class A drug cocaine,1 attempting to import cocaine,2 participating in an organised criminal group3 and a representative charge of money laundering.4

1      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(a)—maximum penalty life imprisonment.
2      Section 6(1)(a); and Crimes Act 1961, ss 66, 72 and 311—maximum penalty 10 years’ imprisonment.
3      Crimes Act, s 98A—maximum penalty 10 years’ imprisonment.
4      Section 243(1)—maximum penalty seven years’ imprisonment.

R v PELAEZ GARCIA [2024] NZHC 1862 [10 July 2024]

The offending

[2] Your offending came to light as a result of a significant police investigation into the importation of cocaine into this country from South America that involved international co-operation with overseas drug enforcement authorities. The drug syndicate operated from at least January 2018 to December 2021. It is estimated in that time that 42.5 kilograms of cocaine with a street price of over $19 million was imported into New Zealand. A further 59.1 kilograms of cocaine with a street value of more than $26 million was also successfully intercepted.

[3] You are 31 years of age. You arrived in New Zealand on 10 August 2018 on a student visa and, like many of your co-offenders, undertook farming work in rural Canterbury. You appear to have become involved in the drug trade approximately a year after your arrival.

[4] Your offending involved the importation or attempted importation of a total of 22 packages of cocaine into this country, which is accepted by your counsel for the purposes of sentencing. From packages intercepted by Customs, it is known you imported 2.447 kilograms of cocaine. However, that figure does not include other successful importations that were not stopped by the Customs Department. Based on a conservative estimate of those parcels having contained at least 500 grams of cocaine, the total amount successfully imported is calculated to be at least
8.447 kilograms. You attempted to import a further 29.639 kilograms, but those packages were intercepted. You were charged with having laundered $302,470.

[5] Your involvement in the importation process was extensive and grew over time. You were paid to identify and provide appropriate addresses to receive packages. After associates left for Columbia, you would contact them for information about importations, including consignee addresses and tracking data. You would pick those packages up on arrival. While not the head of the operation, you certainly became a senior member of it. I will not traverse the details of each of the importations or the packages that were intercepted. However, it is apparent you were heavily involved in making arrangements for these importations and coordinating with others about where…

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 Garcia

Details

AGLC: R v Garcia [2024] NZHC 1862
Case: [2024] NZHC 1862
Decision Date: 10 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Anderson Pelaez Garcia was sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand for his involvement in a large-scale drug importation and money laundering syndicate. Garcia pleaded guilty to charges including importing and attempting to import cocaine, participating in an organised criminal group, and money laundering. The syndicate imported approximately 42.5 kilograms of cocaine, with a street value exceeding $19 million, and successfully intercepted another 59.1 kilograms worth over $26 million. Garcia, who played a leading role in the syndicate, was involved in identifying addresses, coordinating importations, and laundering money. The court determined a starting point of 19 years’ imprisonment for the drug charges and a six-month uplift for money laundering, resulting in an overall starting point of 21 years’ imprisonment. After applying discounts for a belated guilty plea, personal background, and foreign imprisonment, the final sentence was set at 15 years and nine months’ imprisonment, with an additional four months credit for time spent on electronically monitored bail. The court declined to impose a minimum period of imprisonment, concluding that the sentence adequately served the purposes of accountability, denunciation, and deterrence.

Orders