R v H HC Auckland CRI 2009-004-4091

[2009] NZHC 2140

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2009-004-004091

THE QUEEN

v

H

Hearing:         20 November 2009

Appearances: G Kayes for the Crown

H Leabourn for Mr H 

Sentence imposed:     Importing a Class C controlled drug, pseudoephedrine (x1)

12 months home detention

Judgment:      20 November 2009

SENTENCE OF HEATH J

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Auckland

H Leabourn, Auckland

R V H HC AK CRI 2009-004-004091  20 November 2009

[1]      Mr H  , would you please stand.

[2]      H  , you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty, prior to a preliminary hearing in the District Court, to one charge of importing the Class C controlled drug pseudoephedrine into New Zealand.  The offence carries a maximum penalty of 8 years imprisonment.

[3]      You are 19 years old.  You came to New Zealand from South Korea but are now a New Zealand citizen.

[4]      Police intelligence supports the view that Asian students are being procured to receive packages  carrying the active ingredient for methamphetamine.   Once received the student transfers possession to a third party for onward supply to those involved in the manufacture of that drug.

[5]      In November 2008 you were approached by a male, named Mingren He.  Mr He offered to pay you if you provided addresses to which packages could be sent from overseas.  You agreed.  Eight addresses were supplied to him, including your own.

[6]      On 30 December 2008 Customs staff were profiling cargo at the Auckland Airfreight Centre.  A “multipack” postal packaging box was intercepted having been sent by air from China.   The package was addressed to a named female at your address.  The contents were declared to be items of clothing and bedding.

[7]      On examination the clothes and bedding were found to contain carbon paper wrapped packages containing 2,210 grams of pseudoephedrine.   Other similar packages were subsequently intercepted, going to addresses you had supplied.  The total  granules  of  ContacNT  intercepted  were  about  12  kilograms  and  had  the potential to be used to manufacture between 2.4 and 3.6 kilograms of methamphetamine.

[8]      For the Crown Mr Kayes has submitted that the aggravating factors of the offence are the number of importations you facilitated, the extent of potential harm

that could have resulted from the manufacture of methamphetamine, premeditation on your part, and the volume of ContacNT granules imported.

[9]      On your behalf, Mr Leabourn points to your very early guilty plea, to your comparative youth, to your prior good character, and to your co-operation with the Police.  Your personal circumstances and the real remorse you have expressed also count in your favour.   Mr Leabourn emphasises that while other importations occurred you have only been charged with one count arising out of the intended delivery to your home.

[10]     I propose to deal briefly with the basis on which I shall sentence you.

[11]     So far as the offending was concerned it was serious.  It was premeditated, in that you knew you were facilitating importation of the active ingredient for methamphetamine.  The volume of the product imported into New Zealand had the potential to cause harm to many members of our community.

[12]     On the authorities to which I have been referred, I assess the starting point for sentence at 4 years 6 months imprisonment.

[13]     From that, I take account of mitigating factors relating to the offence and to you personally.  I am satisfied that you are generally of good character.  You have the potential to be a valuable citizen of this country.  You now have insight into the nature of your offending and have expressed genuine remorse for it.  That remorse is demonstrated by the letter that I have seen and by your co-operation shown to the Police on and after your arrest.

[14]     In those circumstances I propose to give a generous credit for such mitigating factors.  I allow one-third, which I round to 18 months.  From that you are entitled to a generous credit for an early guilty plea.  I fix that credit at one-third, meaning that the end sentence is one of 2 years imprisonment.

[15]     The   remaining   question   is   whether   home   detention   is   appropriate. Ordinarily, home detention would not be considered for serious offending of this

type.  But, the mix of mitigating factors and your role as a facilitator, rather than a principal, persuades me that a sentence of imprisonment is not necessary to mark your offending.  On that basis you will be sentenced to a term of home detention of one year.

[16]     The  sentence  of  home  detention  shall  be  served  at  12  Clavoy  Place, Dannemora.  You shall go immediately to that address and await the attendance of a probation officer, who will make appropriate arrangements.   You shall not move from that address without prior written consent of your supervising probation officer.

[17]     I hope, Mr H  , you realise that you have been treated leniently.  I hope you make the most of this opportunity in the future.  It is my assessment that you will; please do not prove me wrong.

[18]     Stand down.

P R Heath J