R v Harris - [2012] NZHC 2942

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY

CRI 2010-009-008952 [2012] NZHC 2942

REGINA

v

RUSSELL STAFFORD RICARDO HARRIS

Hearing: 1 November 2012

Counsel: B Hawes and N Robson for Crown
G Nation for Prisoner

Judgment: 1 November 2012

SENTENCING REMARKS OF WHATA J

[1] Mr Harris you have pleaded guilty to the following charges:

(a) One count of manufacture of a Class A controlled drug, methamphetamine;

(b) Two counts of possession of a pistol; and

(c) One count of possession of a restricted weapon.

[2] The lead charge, manufacture of methamphetamine, attracts a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

R V HARRIS HC CHCH CRI 2010-009-008952 [1 November 2012]

Facts

[3] Turning to the facts of your offending. In my view the summary of facts fairly sets the base for the description of your offending. Mr Harris, you in fact acknowledge manufacturing of methamphetamine, the possession of precursor substances and associated equipment at 642 Main South Road. You also acknowledge possession of firearms. You accept that you were involved with Mr Newton, a central figure in a larger methamphetamine enterprise, though you say that you have no real knowledge of the extent of that enterprise. In addition as the summary of facts records, you made contact with Mr Newton on numerous occasions in relation to Mr Newton’s activities.

[4] It is nevertheless difficult to quantify the amounts manufactured at 642 Main South Road. There was however a large number of substances and various items of equipment used to manufacture methamphetamine located at those premises. The substances included phosphorous acid, toluene, iodine, sodium hydroxide and acetone. A set of hot plates, various reaction flasks, conical flasks, a pH meter, steam distiller and submersible pump were also found at the address. Notably 416 pseudoephedrine tablets were located in the kitchen hidden in a box for scales. There was also cash in two bundles of $2,300 and $10,000. All of this points to a commercial operation.

[5] As to the firearms charges, they concern possession of .22 calibre bullets and a .22 calibre revolver, two firearms and a plastic stun gun also located at 642 Main South Road.

Personal circumstances

[6] I have had the opportunity to read a pre-sentence report, which helpfully sets out your personal circumstances.

[7] You are a 34 year old man. You are reported as having been brought up in a gang family environment and that this has impacted on you negatively in your

younger years. Your family, however, is no longer identified with a gang culture and supports you. You have a limited employment history, affected by your gang membership and subsequent drug misuse issues. Your stated intention is to commence an electrical engineering course during your time in prison or upon release.

[8] The pre-sentencing report also records that you are mostly in agreement with the summary of facts relating to the current convictions for manufacture of methamphetamine and unlawful possession of pistols. You have accepted responsibility for manufacturing of methamphetamine, but say it was…

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 Harris

Details

AGLC: R v Harris [2012] NZHC 2942
Case: [2012] NZHC 2942
Decision Date: 1 November 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Whata J was tasked with sentencing Russell Stafford Ricardo Harris on various charges including the manufacture of methamphetamine, possession of pistols, and possession of a restricted weapon. Harris had pleaded guilty to all charges, which involved significant quantities of precursor substances and equipment used in the manufacture of methamphetamine, as well as possession of firearms. The court heard submissions from both the Crown and Harris’ counsel regarding the appropriate sentence.

The primary legal issue was determining the appropriate starting point for the sentence on the lead charge of manufacturing methamphetamine, considering the commercial scale of the operation and the overall offending. The court was also required to assess the relevance of the firearms charges and the mitigating factors presented, including Harris' early guilty plea, his remorse, and his intent to rehabilitate.

The court found that the manufacturing operation was commercial in nature, albeit at the lower end of the scale. The court applied a starting point of five years imprisonment, reduced by 10% for Harris’ demonstrated remorse and commitment to change, and an additional 20% discount for his early guilty plea. This resulted in a sentence of three years and six months for the lead charge. For the firearms charges, the court imposed sentences of six months each, to be served concurrently with the lead sentence. Consequently, the effective sentence was set at four years imprisonment.

The final orders of the court were that Harris be sentenced to three years and six months imprisonment for the manufacture of methamphetamine, and six months imprisonment for each count of unlawful possession of a pistol and possession of a restricted weapon, with these sentences to be served concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of four years imprisonment.

Orders