R v Moka

Case [2016] NZHC 40


IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CRI 2014-085-12904 [2016] NZHC 40

THE QUEEN

v

MARIA HIKI ANGELA MOKA

Hearing: 1 February 2016

Counsel:

S Woods for Crown
M Zintl for Defendant

Sentence:

1 February 2016

SENTENCE OF SIMON FRANCE J

[1]      Mrs Moka is to be sentenced following an indication given in November last year.

[2]      There are two charges involving methamphetamine – one of importing, the other of conspiring to import.  Mrs Moka was not the organiser – her son was.  But he was in prison and so she agreed to assist him – no doubt there was some pressure involved.  However, Mrs Moka knew what she was involved in, and played an active role in receiving the importation, and passing it on, including managing the cash.

[3]      Mrs Moka is 59 years old.  She committed offences when younger but there has been nothing for 20 years.   She is married and has a son who lives with her.

There are also other adult children.

R v MOKA [2016] NZHC 40 [1 February 2016]

[4]      This sentencing today is one of frustration for all involved – it is a tragedy that at this stage of her life and still with the care of a child Mrs Moka allowed herself to be dragged into this sort of activity.   But it is serious offending and offending which visits its own brand of tragedy on the many who become dependent on the drug.

[5]      The sentence indication took a starting point of five years for importation of

100 grams and added six months for the conspiracy to import a second amount.  I deducted one year for the lesser involvement and the circumstances of her involvement and gave a 25 per cent credit for the plea.  Given the need to emphasise deterrence, no other changes are appropriate.

[6]      Please stand.

[7]      On the charges of importing methamphetamine and  conspiring to import methamphetamine, you are sentenced to terms of imprisonment of three years four

months.  Both sentences will be served at the same time.

Simon France J

Solicitors:

Luke Cunningham & Clere, Crown Solicitors, Wellington
M Zintl, Barrister, Wellington

Details
AGLC
R v Moka [2016] NZHC 40
Case
[2016] NZHC 40
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Moka, the defendant, Maria Hiki Angela Moka, was sentenced in the High Court of New Zealand, Wellington Registry. Mrs Moka was found guilty of importing and conspiring to import methamphetamine. The court heard that while Mrs Moka was not the primary organiser of the importation, she played an active role in receiving and distributing the drugs, as well as managing the financial transactions. She was influenced by her son, who was the main organiser and was in prison at the time of the offence.

The court was required to determine the appropriate sentence for Mrs Moka, taking into account her age, background, and the nature of her involvement in the drug importation. The court considered factors such as her age, her previous clean criminal record, and the fact that she was caring for a child at the time of the offence. The court also had to balance the need for deterrence with the circumstances of Mrs Moka's involvement.

Simon France J sentenced Mrs Moka to three years and four months in prison for both the importation and conspiracy charges, to be served concurrently. The court took into account the seriousness of the offences, the need for deterrence, and the lesser role Mrs Moka played in the importation. The court also gave credit for her plea of guilty, reducing the sentence by 25%.

The court emphasised the tragedy of Mrs Moka's involvement in the drug importation at such a late stage in her life, especially given her responsibilities as a caregiver. The court acknowledged the harm caused by drug dependency and the need to deter similar offences in the future. The sentence reflects a balance between punishment, deterrence, and the circumstances of Mrs Moka's involvement.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.