R v Hastie - [2013] NZHC 1564

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY

CRI-2010-070-7804 [2013] NZHC 1564

THE QUEEN

v

ALEXANDRA HASTIE and
KENNEDY O'CONNOR WILLIAMS

Hearing: 26 June 2013 (Heard at Rotorua)

Counsel: N Belton for the Crown
K W Burroughs for Ms Hastie
A Schulze and T Grimwood for Mr Williams

Sentencing: 26 June 2013

SENTENCE OF WOODHOUSE J

Solicitors:
Mr N Belton, Ronayne Hollister-Jones Lellman, Office of the Crown Solicitor, Tauranga
Mr K W Burroughs, Solicitor, Hamilton
Mr A Schulze, Lance & Lawson, Solicitors, Rotorua

R v HASTIE and WILLIAMS [2013] NZHC 1564 [26 June 2013]

[1] Ms Hastie and Mr Williams, you appear for sentence for offences relating to methamphetamine manufacture and dealing and some other offences.

[2] The charges arose out of a Police operation which led to the charging and subsequent sentencing of, I think it is, nine other people. Six others were sentenced by me on 8 February 2013.[1] Both of you were to be sentenced then but your sentencing was deferred to give each of you an opportunity to complete treatment for drug addiction at Odyssey House.

[1] R v Duncan [2013] NZHC 193.

[3] Part of the background to your offences and matters of a general nature relating to sentencing for offences of this sort are contained in the sentencing notes for the other offenders. I do not intend to repeat all of that. It is to be taken to apply on this sentencing to the extent relevant.

[4] As with the other offenders on sentencing, I also do not intend to outline all of the facts relating to your offences. The individual offences and basic particulars are in the schedule attached to the February sentencing notes. I will attach another copy to these sentencing notes.

[5] Also, as with the other offenders, I do not intend to refer to all of the information relating to your personal circumstances. But this, together with all of the submissions made on your behalf, is taken into account as well as the submissions for the Crown.

Sentences in summary

[6] As I expect you will understand, I need to explain the reasons for the sentences I will impose, not just for your benefit but for the benefit of the community as a whole, as well as family. That will take some time. But it is appropriate to tell you at the outset what the sentences will be.

[7] Ms Hastie, I have determined that a sentence of home detention can be imposed on you. I do not have a home detention report. It is a technical thing that

needs to be done and for that reason what I am going to do is I am going to explain why I come to that conclusion and then I am going to adjourn your sentencing to get a home detention report. Hopefully, there will be a favourable report. I do want you to please concentrate on what I have to say because it is important in relation to the…

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 Hastie

Details

AGLC: R v Hastie [2013] NZHC 1564
Case: [2013] NZHC 1564
Decision Date: 26 June 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Alexandra Hastie and Kennedy O'Connor Williams were sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand Tauranga Registry for drug manufacturing and dealing offences. The primary legal issues involved determining appropriate starting points for the lead offences, assessing the defendants' levels of culpability, and evaluating personal circumstances for sentencing mitigation. The Court identified the lead offences for Alexandra Hastie as conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine (counts 8 and 16) and for Kennedy O'Connor Williams as conspiracy to supply methamphetamine (counts 1, 2, and 4). The Court determined a starting point of 3 years for Hastie and 5 years for Williams. After considering personal circumstances, rehabilitation efforts, and other factors, the Court imposed a sentence of home detention for Hastie and 3 years and 7 months imprisonment for Williams. The Court provided detailed reasons for the sentencing, ensuring transparency and accountability in the judicial process.

Orders