R v Given

[2012] NZHC 1865

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI-2012-009-002732 [2012] NZHC 1865

THE QUEEN

v

STEPHEN JAMES GIVEN

Hearing:         27 July 2012

Appearances: MAV Raj for Crown

G P Tyrrell for Accused

Judgment:      27 July 2012

REMARKS ON SENTENCE OF CHISHOLM J

[1]      Stephen Given, you have pleaded guilty to a charge of possession of cannabis for supply.  That charge was laid in the District Court but, as you know, a District Court Judge declined jurisdiction because of what really is an anomaly in the law. The result is that it is necessary for sentence to be passed by this Court.

[2]      When a car that  you were driving was stopped 62.4 grams of cannabis, scales, zip lock bags and $325 in cash were found.

[3]      At the age of 22 you have no relevant previous convictions.  The probation officer describes  you  as  naive.    It  is  apparent  from  the report  that  you  have a supportive  family  who  are,  to  say  the  least,  appalled  by  your  conduct  on  this occasion, which is not surprising.   And as Mr Tyrrell said, all too often people

appearing in this Court do not have parental support. You do, and you must never let

R V GIVEN HC CHCH CRI-2012-009-002732 [27 July 2012]

your  family down  again  in  this  way.    The  probation  officer  indicates  that  you sincerely regret the offending.  The assessment is that the risk of re-offending is low. Home detention is recommended.

[4]      There are no  aggravating or mitigating features relating to the offending itself.  Nor are there any aggravating features concerning you personally.  As far as the mitigating features are concerned, first there is your plea of guilty, secondly, parental support.

[5]      This  offending  falls  within  category  2  of  a  case  called  R  v  Turewi.[1]

Mr Tyrrell  thinks  a  starting  point  of  perhaps  something  less  than  two  years  is appropriate.  However, I agree with the Crown that the appropriate starting point is two years.  Once I allow for the guilty plea that comes down to 18 months which is within the home detention range.  Mr Tyrrell has listed the factors that support home detention  on  this  occasion,  and  I accept  that  home  detention  is  the appropriate sentence.

[1] R v Turewi [1999] 3 NZLR 62 (CA).

[6]      You are sentenced to nine months home detention.  The following conditions will apply:

(a)      Immediately after sentencing you are to travel to and await the arrival of the probation officer and the representative of the monitoring company.

(b)You  are to  reside  at  Flat  2,  8  Coops Terrace,  Kaiapoi,  under the conditions of home detention.

(c)       You are not to possess or consume alcohol while on home detention.

(d)You are to be assessed for alcohol and drug treatment and if found suitable  you  are  to  complete  any  recommended  treatment  to  the

satisfaction of the probation officer and the treatment provider.

(e)       Finally, there will be an order forfeiting the sum of $325.

[7]      I am not entirely sure whether you realise the seriousness of the charge that you face.  Possession for supply is always a serious charge.  Do not misinterpret the leniency of the Court on this occasion.  Any further appearance relating to drugs is likely to have very dire consequences.   Make use of this opportunity to put this offending behind you.  Do not let your family down again on the way that you have on this occasion.

[8]      There will be an order for the destruction of the cannabis and seized utensils.

Solicitors:

Raymond Donnelly, P O Box 533, Christchurch 8140,  [email protected]

Weston Ward & Lascelles, Christchurch,  [email protected]