R v Mataki-Kaiaruna - [2017] NZHC 1288

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY

CRI-2015-088-003515 [2017] NZHC 1288

THE QUEEN

v

TONY MATAKI-KAIARUNA

Hearing: 7 June 2017

Appearances:

N Dore for the Crown
J A Young for the Defendant

Sentence:

7 June 2017

SENTENCING NOTES OF HINTON J

Counsel/Solicitors:
Marsden Woods Inskip Smith, Whangarei
Julie Young, Barrister, Whangarei

R v TONY MATAKI-KAIARUNA [2017] NZHC 1288 [7 June 2017]

Introduction

[1] Mr Mataki-Kaiaruna, you have pleaded guilty to seven charges. Two relate to conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine, one is in relation to conspiracy to supply methamphetamine, three for the supply of methamphetamine and one for possession of methamphetamine for supply.

[2] The conspiracy-related charges carry a maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment. The maximum sentence for the supply of methamphetamine and possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of supply charges is life imprisonment.

Facts

[3] The charges arose as a consequence of the police investigation referred to as “Operation Atlas”. This operation targeted the members of the Head Hunters motorcycle gang, as well as their associates, in their drug manufacturing and drug dealing activities.

[4] The Police obtained warrants authorising them to intercept cellphone conversations and text messages. You were identified as involved in the supply of methamphetamine and conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. In total, you supplied, possessed for the purpose of supply and conspired to supply at least
413.8 grams of methamphetamine. Of this amount, 7.8 grams of methamphetamine was found by Police during the search of a car that you had been travelling in on
16 December 2015. Your admission to Police that you had sold 7 grams of methamphetamine per week for the past year between 2014 and 2015 also materially assisted in determining how much methamphetamine was involved in these charges.

[5] The estimated amount of methamphetamine involved in the charges of conspiring to manufacture methamphetamine is 240 grams.

[6] You became involved in this offending as a result of being a prospect member of the Head Hunters motorcycle gang. You operated under the direct instruction of

senior members of the Northland Head Hunters. You were responsible for ensuring the senior Head Hunters’ orders were carried out. This involved receiving phone calls and passing on messages. You also acted as a distributor of methamphetamine. You distributed and supplied methamphetamine to street dealers and the income derived from this dealing was given to your superiors in the gang. You received payment for your actions in the gang.

Purposes and principles of sentencing

[7] In sentencing you today I take into consideration the purposes and principles of sentencing. I consider that in your situation there are particular principles and purposes that are of relevance, namely accountability, deterrence, denunciation, promoting a sense of responsibility in you. I must also take into account the gravity and seriousness of your offending, while ensuring the sentence reached is consistent with appropriate sentencing levels. I must also impose the least restrictive outcome appropriate in the circumstances.

Personal circumstances

[8] You are 29 years old. You have a twin, and…

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 Mataki-Kaiaruna

Details

AGLC: R v Mataki-Kaiaruna [2017] NZHC 1288
Case: [2017] NZHC 1288
Decision Date: 7 June 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, the case of The Queen versus Tony Mataki-Kaiaruna was heard and sentenced on 7 June 2017. The defendant, Tony Mataki-Kaiaruna, pleaded guilty to seven charges related to methamphetamine manufacturing and supply, including conspiracy to manufacture and supply, and possession for the purpose of supply. The legal issues before the court involved determining an appropriate sentence for the defendant's involvement in drug-related activities, as well as the impact of his early guilty plea and remorse on the sentencing outcome. The court considered the purposes and principles of sentencing, including accountability, deterrence, denunciation, and promoting a sense of responsibility. The defendant's personal circumstances, motivation, and prior convictions were also taken into account.

The court began by establishing a starting point for sentencing, considering the lead offences to be the possession for supply, supply, and conspiracy to supply methamphetamine. The amount of methamphetamine involved in these charges was 413.8 grams, placing the defendant's offending towards the middle or higher end of band three of the sentencing bands for sale or supply of methamphetamine. The court determined that a starting point of nine years' imprisonment would be justified for the supply charges alone. For the conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine charges, the court found that an appropriate starting point would be five years' imprisonment. After adjusting the starting point for totality, the court fixed a starting point of 10 years to reflect all of the methamphetamine-related offending. The court then considered aggravating and mitigating factors, including the defendant's early guilty plea, his remorse, and the information he provided to the police regarding his own offending. After applying the appropriate discounts, the court sentenced the defendant to six years and nine months' imprisonment for the possession for supply, supply, and conspiracy to supply methamphetamine charges, and five years' imprisonment for the conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine charges. These sentences were to be served concurrently, with a maximum term of six years and nine months' imprisonment, subject to parole conditions.

The court also cancelled the defendant's outstanding fines of $5,779.89. In conclusion, the court recognised the seriousness of the defendant's drug-related offending, while also taking into account his remorse, early guilty plea, and efforts to provide information to the police. The court imposed a sentence that aimed to achieve the purposes and principles of sentencing, while also ensuring the sentence was appropriate for the defendant's involvement in the offending.

Orders