R v Hung - [2017] NZHC 467

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2016-004-2124 [2017] NZHC 467

THE QUEEN

v

TZU TE HUNG

Hearing: 16 March 2017

Appearances:

B R Northwood for Crown
M N Pecotic for Defendant

Judgment:

16 March 2017

SENTENCING REMARKS OF LANG J

R v HUNG [2017] NZHC 467 [16 March 2017]

[1] Mr Hung, you appear for sentence having pleaded guilty to a charge of importing methamphetamine. Originally you also faced three charges of being in possession of methamphetamine for supply. The Crown has offered no evidence on those charges. I now discharge you on those charges pursuant to s 147 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.

[2] Your guilty plea followed a sentence indication at which I heard submissions from both counsel regarding the sentence to be imposed on you in respect of the importing charge. I do not propose to repeat the process by which I arrived at the indicated sentence. That will be found in my sentence indication remarks, which will be annexed to, and form part of, these sentencing remarks.

[3] In short, you pleaded guilty to importing 39.6 kilograms of methamphetamine on 21 February 2016. I took a starting point of 20 years imprisonment. I then reduced that by one year, or five per cent, to reflect the fact that you have previously been of good character. I then reduced the sentence further by four years nine months, or 25 per cent, to reflect your guilty plea. This produced an end sentence indication of 14 years three months imprisonment. I also said I would not impose a minimum term of imprisonment, because that was the approach taken by this Court in respect of your co-offender. You pleaded guilty on the basis of that indication.

[4] I have now received a pre-sentence report that provides me with assistance regarding your background and the circumstances giving rise to your offending. This shows that you were approached by another person in your home country. That person offered you the opportunity to travel to New Zealand. You took that opportunity because you had never travelled abroad before. You knew when you came to New Zealand that you would be assisting in the importation of drugs. You say, however, that you did not know that you would be required to physically deal with the drugs. You also say that you were then threatened by those above you in the organisation. This led you to conclude you had no option but to do as they said.

[5] That may be so, but nevertheless, you knowingly became involved in a very substantial importation of methamphetamine. People like you play an important role

in any drug importation because they protect the organisers from being arrested. That is why the Court imposes significant sentences of imprisonment when offenders such as you are detected.

[6] The only issue I need to determine is the extent to which, if at all, I should reduce the sentence further having regard to mitigating factors other than those…

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 Hung

Details

AGLC: R v Hung [2017] NZHC 467
Case: [2017] NZHC 467
Decision Date: 16 March 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Hung was heard in the High Court of New Zealand, Auckland Registry, where Tzu Te Hung, a Taiwanese national, faced charges related to the importation and possession of methamphetamine. Hung was arrested and charged after a significant drug importation involving 39.6 kilograms of methamphetamine was intercepted by police and Customs officers. Hung had arrived in New Zealand to receive a shipment of methamphetamine from China, and he had assisted in the removal and distribution of the drugs. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for Hung's role in this importation.

The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of the appropriate sentence for Hung's involvement in the importation of a substantial quantity of methamphetamine. The court needed to consider the starting point for sentencing, any aggravating or mitigating factors, and whether a minimum term of imprisonment should be imposed. The court also had to consider the impact of Hung's guilty plea and his background on the sentencing decision.

The court began by selecting a starting point of 20 years imprisonment, reflecting the seriousness of the offence. This was reduced by five percent to account for Hung's previously good character, and further reduced by 25 percent for his early guilty plea. The Crown had agreed to no additional charges being pursued, and the court decided not to impose a minimum term of imprisonment. After considering the pre-sentence report and other mitigating factors, the court decided to reduce the sentence by a further six months, resulting in a final sentence of 13 years and nine months imprisonment for the charge of importing methamphetamine. Hung will be eligible to apply for parole after serving one-third of his sentence and can be deported after serving one-third of his sentence.

In conclusion, Hung was sentenced to 13 years and nine months imprisonment for importing methamphetamine, with no minimum term of imprisonment. The court took into account his guilty plea, his previously good character, and the hardship he would face serving his sentence in a foreign country where he does not speak the language. The court also considered Hung's involvement in the importation of a significant quantity of drugs and the role he played in protecting the organisers from arrest.

Orders