R v Kingi - [2013] NZHC 2051

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CRI 2010-088-2612 [2013] NZHC 2051

THE QUEEN

IKE WELLINGTON KINGI

Hearing: 13 August 2013

Counsel: C Gisler for Crown

A B Fairley for Mr Kingi

Judgment: 13 August 2013

SENTENCING NOTES OF HEATH J

Solicitors:

Crown Solicitor, Whangarei

Thomson Wilson, Whangarei

R v KINGI [2013] NZHC 2051 [13 August 2013]

Ike Wellington King, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty on the second day of your trial to one count of supplying methamphetamine, six of offering to supply methamphetamine and one of possessing the Class C controlled drug cannabis for the purpose of supply.
On the remaining charges the Crown offers no evidence. You are discharged on the following counts in the indictment: counts 1, 2, 22, 24, 38, 46, 76, 79, 80, 83, 85, 86, 88 and 89. Those discharges have the effect of acquittals on each of those charges.
The total amount of methamphetamine was 8gms. While the cannabis charge involved 103.4gms or 3.6 ounces.
The methamphetamine offending occurred between 23 January and 10 February 2010 and on both 10 and 20 April 2010. The cannabis was found in your possession on 12 May 2010.
A summary of relevant facts has been agreed for the purposes of sentencing. A short précis is all that is required for present purposes.
Your offending was detected during a covert electronic surveillance police operation known as Operation Arabia. You were identified from text messages as a person involved in commercial dealing. You and others who were involved in this enterprise were either members of or had strong links to the Head Hunters motorcycle gang.
Your pleas relate to three distinct transactions. They are set out in the agreed summary. It is sufficient to record that between 28 January 2010 and 9 February 2010, from text messaging it is clear that you offered to supply quantities of methamphetamine. On 10 April 2010, you supplied two grams of methamphetamine to a co-offender, Ms Clunie. On 19 April 2010, you offered to supply a further one gram of methamphetamine to other people. The cannabis was found in your possession when a search warrant was executed on termination of the operation on 12 May 2010.

You have managed to amass some 17 previous convictions, though only one of those was drug related. The remaining ones involved a mixture of burglary, violence. They were at the lower end of criminal offending. You were not seen, originally, as showing any willingness to address the reasons for your offending. The author of the original pre-sentence report recorded that you showed little insight and no remorse for it. The reporter assessed you as being at moderate risk of reoffending.
Among the factors that influenced Judges in sentencing co-offenders, was the fact that methamphetamine is a powerful and extremely destructive drug. Over the last 10 years or so it has caused enormous pain and suffering to many in our community and has been responsible for many other criminal activities.
Another…

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 Kingi

Details

AGLC: R v Kingi [2013] NZHC 2051
Case: [2013] NZHC 2051
Decision Date: 13 August 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Kingi, the defendant, Ike Wellington Kingi, appeared before the High Court of New Zealand in Whangarei for sentencing. Kingi had pleaded guilty to one count of supplying methamphetamine, six counts of offering to supply methamphetamine, and one count of possessing cannabis for the purpose of supply. The methamphetamine involved a total of 8 grams, and the cannabis amounted to 103.4 grams. The offending occurred between January and May 2010, and Kingi was a member of or had strong links to the Head Hunters motorcycle gang.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were determining the appropriate starting point for sentencing, considering Kingi's extensive criminal history and the nature of his offending, and evaluating the mitigating factors, particularly his efforts at rehabilitation. The court also had to consider the principle of consistency in sentencing, ensuring that Kingi's sentence aligned with other sentences for similar offending and that there was parity in the sentences of co-offenders.

The court acknowledged the destructive nature of methamphetamine and its significant impact on the community. It considered the sentencing guidelines, which suggested a starting point of two to four years for methamphetamine supply involving quantities up to five grams and two to four years for cannabis dealing. Given the total offending, the court chose a starting point of three years, adding three months to account for Kingi's criminal history. The court then applied a 40% credit for Kingi's rehabilitative efforts and remorse, reducing the sentence to one year and ten months. An additional 10% credit was given for his late plea of guilty, resulting in a final sentence of 12 months of home detention and 200 hours of community work. The court also ordered the forfeiture of $22,190 found in Kingi's possession.

In summary, the court imposed a sentence of 12 months home detention and 200 hours of community work on each charge, to be served concurrently. Kingi was also required to undertake specified programmes and refrain from alcohol and drug consumption during his sentence and for six months thereafter. The court commended Kingi for his significant rehabilitative efforts and expressed hope for his continued progress.

Orders