R v Matthews

[2012] NZHC 3545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PALMERSTON NORTH REGISTRY

CRI 2011-054-463 [2012] NZHC 3545

THE QUEEN

v

CRAIG WAYNE MATTHEWS

Hearing:         19 December 2012 (Heard at Wellington)

Counsel:         E C Killeen for Crown

R B Crowley for Accused

Sentence:       19 December 2012

SENTENCE OF RONALD YOUNG J

[1]      Mr Matthews,  you  are  now  for  sentence  having  pleaded  guilty  to  three charges  of  supplying  methamphetamine  and  two  of  manufacturing methamphetamine.   Your offending was part of a Police investigation called Operation Stamp which intercepted communications relating to a large methamphetamine network.  You were the leader of this drug operation.   You arranged the supply of precursors, arranged the manufacture of methamphetamine and supplied the produced methamphetamine.  The scale of the offending involves turnover of somewhere around $700,000 over a period of less than 12 months and between  1  and  1.6 kilograms  of  methamphetamine.    In  particular,  some  of  the

offending was as follows.

R V CRAIG WAYNE MATTHEWS HC PMN CRI 2011-054-463 [19 December 2012]

[2]      Firstly,  with  respect  to  the  supply  charges,  on  19  November  2010  you travelled to Hamilton to arrange to collect methamphetamine from a co-offender. You arranged for another co-offender to travel to Hamilton to make the pick-up. That co-offender then transported the drug back to Palmerston North.   Intercepted conversations revealed that you arranged for it to be temporarily buried in a back yard.  The next day you met with your co-offender and organised for her to meet with another unknown person to supply you with the methamphetamine.

[3]      In early December you met with another co-offender, supplied 11 grams of methamphetamine at $800 per gram and there were other supplies that probably occurred in mid December and early January.

[4]      Count three of the indictment relates to large amounts of cash located at the address linked to you.  $241,000 of buried cash was found in bags which contained your  fingerprints.    During  this  time  you  were  in  receipt  of  a  benefit.    Further financial inquiries showed that large amounts of cash were banked by you and large amounts spent on vehicles including motor cycles.

[5]      With regard to the manufacturing charges, in late November 2010 you met with an associate who manufactured methamphetamine.   You assisted him in the manufacture and arranged the purchase and delivery of the drugs then produced. Some 420 grams was made and supplied on this occasion.   Shortly afterwards, a payment of $55,000 was made to manufacture further methamphetamine out of the precursor material that remained.

[6]     In mid December you were again involved in the manufacture of methamphetamine. You arranged to source precursor material, arranged for others to travel and pick up the material and arranged for others still to manufacture and then pick up the produced methamphetamine.   On this occasion over 400 grams was supplied and on this occasion a co-offender was intercepted by the Police.

[7]      On each occasion you have typically arranged for others to do the work and you have remained in the background directing what was to happen.

[8]      You are 38 years of age and have three children.  You have been involved with both the Tribesmen and Rebel motorcycle gangs although you say now that you have renounced gang involvement and will not go back.  The Probation Officer notes that you do have some insight into your offending.   You developed an unhealthy gambling addiction and most of the proceeds were said to feed that addiction.  You claim you were not the mastermind behind the operation but that you were equally culpable  with  other  co-offenders.     But  as  the  Crown  say  this  view  of  your involvement is not really supported by the intercepted conversations that took place over the period of the charges.

[9]      The Probation Officer, however, believes that you are genuinely remorseful, that you do understand the gravity of the offending and you do understand the impact the inevitable imprisonment is going to have on your family and in particular your children.  They think you are motivated to change.  I note that you do have previous convictions but  you have never previously been imprisoned and they are of no relevance to my sentence.

[10]     Both counsel accept that this offending falls within band four of R v Fatu.[1]

The Crown say a start sentence of 16 to 17 years is appropriate.  They say for the supply alone, 12 and a half years and a further uplift of two to three years for the manufacturing and for the fact that you were involved in a gang which tried to establish itself in New Zealand when the offending began.  They point to the large scale commercial offending, the fact that you were involved throughout in the chain of supplying the precursors to manufacturing to supplying the methamphetamine, is significant.

[1] R v Fatu [2006] 2 NZLR 72.

[11]     Your counsel says that the proper starting point for the offending is 13 and a half years’ imprisonment taking account of your involvement in the offending and the fact that the purity of the drug at 55 per cent was below the 60 per cent ordinarily found.

[12]     I am satisfied that the proper starting point is one of 15 years’ imprisonment

reflecting what I indicated in my original sentencing indication.  This was large-scale

commercial dealing but also important is the fact that you were involved, as the Crown say, in every stage of the process of manufacturing, obtaining precursors and supplying methamphetamine.  It is clear that others did your bidding and you were in charge.

[13]     In my sentence indication I indicated I would allow seven per cent for the reduction for purity of the methamphetamine, the fact that there were significant forfeiture orders agreed to by you and an allowance for strict bail conditions which I keep to today.

[14]     As to your guilty plea, I indicated I was prepared to deduct 20 per cent.  That was then generous.  Your plea was to come significantly after you were first charged and close to trial.  However, after your indication of a guilty plea and that you would accept the sentence indication, you absconded.   You then had a further period of freedom when you would have ordinarily been serving a sentence of imprisonment. More importantly, this now makes  your guilty plea even more remote from the original charges.  I am not, therefore, prepared any longer to give you a reduction of

20 per cent for your guilty plea. That is now reduced to 15 per cent.

[15]     I take into account the forfeiture orders which has resolved most but not all of these matters.  In terms of the breach of bail charge, because I have already taken into account the fact that you breached your bail in reducing the guilty plea discount, I simply convict and discharge you on that.

[16]     The total deductions are, therefore, 22 per cent.  The final sentence which I

impose  on  each  of  the  charges  concurrently  is  11  years  and  eight  months’

imprisonment.  No minimum period of imprisonment was sought and I impose none.

Ronald Young J

Solicitors:

E C Killeen, Ben Vanderkolk & Associates, Palmerston North, email:  [email protected]

R B Crowley, Solicitor, Wanganui, email:  [email protected]