R v Mihaka

Sharon Mihaka was sentenced for eight drug-related offences, including possession of methamphetamine for supply and supplying methamphetamine. Mihaka had been involved in selling methamphetamine and cannabis from her shop in Tokoroa, New Zealand, and was arrested and charged along with her co-offenders. Mihaka had initially pleaded guilty to all charges but later vacated her pleas to two possession counts, leading to a trial on the contested counts. The court found Mihaka guilty of all three counts and fixed the quantities of methamphetamine involved in the offences.

The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for Mihaka, taking into account the severity of her offences, the need for consistency with other cases, and the need to impose a sentence near the maximum if warranted. The court also had to consider the principles of rehabilitation, deterrence, denunciation, and protection of the community. Mihaka's personal circumstances, such as her age and addiction issues, were taken into account to some extent, but the court could not consider them heavily due to the seriousness of her drug-related offences.

The Crown argued for a starting point of nine years imprisonment for Mihaka's lead offences, based on the quantity of methamphetamine involved and the sophistication of her offending. The Crown also argued for an uplift in sentence due to Mihaka's four supply offences and the exposure of her granddaughter to the methamphetamine trade. Mihaka's defence counsel argued for a lower starting point, considering the quantity of methamphetamine involved and the fact that Mihaka was a retailer rather than a wholesaler. The defence also argued for a discount for Mihaka's time on electronic monitoring bail and her maintained pleas.

The court decided to rank Mihaka with her main supplier, Mr Bennett, and took the same starting point for her possession for supply offences as that taken for Mr Bennett's supply offences, eight and a half years imprisonment. The court did not increase the sentence for Mihaka's further offending, her supply offences, as they were inherent in her possession offences and confirmed the starting point adopted. The court also took into account Mihaka's time on electronic monitoring bail, her maintained pleas, her addiction issues, and her age in determining her sentence.

In conclusion, the court sentenced Mihaka to imprisonment for four years and six months for her possession for supply offences and three years and six months for her supply offences, with an effective sentence of four years and six months. The court did not impose a minimum term, which is usually 50% for retail suppliers at Mihaka's level. The court also made an order under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 forfeiting the items set out in the police schedule served on Mihaka and her counsel.