R v Henry - [2015] NZHC 1684

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICVLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL OF CO- DEFENDANTS. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST

PERMITTED.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2014-004-5509

[2015] NZHC 1684

THE QUEEN

v

DEBORAH ANNE HENRY

Hearing: 20 July 2015

Appearances:

R Thomson for Crown

B L Sellars for Defendant

Sentence:

20 July 2015

SENTENCING REMARKS OF WHATA J

Solicitors:
Meredith Connell, Crown Solicitors, Auckland Copy to:
B L Sellars, Auckland

R v HENRY [2015] NZHC 1684 [20 July 2015]

[1] Ms Henry, you have pleaded guilty to one count of obtaining a document and one count of money laundering, following a sentencing indication. The maximum sentence for each count is seven years’ imprisonment.

[2] In the sentencing indication I foreshadowed a sentence in the range of 22 to 30 months’ imprisonment, including within that a 25 per cent discount for a guilty plea.1

Facts

[3] Ms Henry, you were a member of a drug ring alongside Michael Cavanagh, Shannon Stevens, Peter Shaw, David O’Connor and Nigel Bowker. In 2005 you were charged and later convicted of possession of equipment used to manufacture methamphetamine and provision for supply of methamphetamine. You received a sentence of two years’ imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention, which was granted after five and a half months had been served.

[4] Mr Cavanagh was also sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment for his part in the ring.

[5] The present charges assert that you in or about 12 October 2004, using a false name, Michelle Anna Alexandra, applied for and obtained a driver’s licence. You also went to the New Zealand Vault and opened a safe under your false name. In July 2012 Mr Cavanagh signed on as an agent to the safety deposit box. A search of the box in May 2014 located $300,170.

Personal history

[6] You were in a long term relationship with Mr Cavanagh and had developed close links with him and his family from a very young age. You have a daughter together, who is aged six. I am now advised that you have severed your connection with Mr Cavanagh and that you are now in a stable relationship with another partner.

1 R v Henry [2015] NZHC 1306 [9 June 2015].

Pre-sentencing report

[7] Your pre-sentencing report recommends home detention, having assessed the likelihood of reoffending and your risk to others as low. Significantly also, you are assessed as highly motivated to address the factors behind your offending.

Your personal statement

[8] I have also read your statement to the Court. You describe how you have settled into a supportive family unit. You reside with your current partner and you are a stay-at-home mum caring for three children aged six, thirteen and sixteen. You also help as an aide at your local school. You acknowledge your wrong-doing. All of this is to…

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 Henry

Details

AGLC: R v Henry [2015] NZHC 1684
Case: [2015] NZHC 1684
Decision Date: 20 July 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the Auckland Registry of the High Court of New Zealand involved Deborah Anne Henry, who pleaded guilty to charges of obtaining a document and money laundering. The presiding judge, Whata J, delivered sentencing remarks on 20 July 2015. The court considered the defendant's personal history, her role in a drug ring, and her current circumstances, including her stable relationship and commitment to her family. The key legal issues were the appropriate sentence for the offences and whether home detention was a suitable alternative to imprisonment.

The court recognised several mitigating factors, including the lack of personal gain from the money laundering, the defendant's limited involvement in the crime, and the unsophisticated nature of the offending. The court also considered the pre-sentencing report, which recommended home detention due to the defendant's low risk of reoffending and high motivation for rehabilitation. The court concluded that a sentence of home detention was appropriate, taking into account the defendant's remorse, her current commitment to a stable family life, and the absence of incidents while on bail. The court sentenced Henry to nine months' home detention, with specific conditions including residence at a designated address, participation in alcohol and drug programmes, and abstention from alcohol and drugs. The court also withdrew several other charges against the defendant.

Orders