R v S HC Auckland CRI 2008-055-573

[2009] NZHC 422

This case has been anonymized

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI 2008-055-000573

THE QUEEN

v

S

Charge:Possession of methamphetamine; Attempting to pervert the course of justice

Plea:               Guilty

Appearances: Kirsten Lummis for Crown

Douglas Blaikie for Prisoner

Sentenced:     7 April 2009

100 hours community service; 15 months supervision

SENTENCING NOTES OF HARRISON J

SOLICITORS

Meredith Connell (Auckland) for Crown

Douglas J Blaikie (Kaikohe) for Accused

R V S HC AK CRI 2008-055-000573  7 April 2009

[1]      Ms S  , counsel have conferred.  The Crown very responsibly does not seek a custodial order.  Mr Blaikie submits, and I agree, that the appropriate sentence should be a period of intensive supervision coupled with community service. Accordingly, you are sentenced to 100 hours of community service.   You are to report to the probation service at Kaikohe by 4 pm on 9 April 2009 for that purpose. You  are  also  sentenced  to  a  term  of  intensive  supervision  for  15 months.    In particular, you are to undertake an assessment and if found suitable to participate in drug and alcohol counselling including if necessary residential, as directed by the probation service.

[2]      Ms S  , I have taken into account a number of factors in imposing a community based sentence.  Having reviewed all the evidence, and having heard you yesterday, I am satisfied that your involvement in the alleged wrongdoing giving rise to these charges is relatively minor; in other words, you were very much a secondary party.   The substituted charge of possession of methamphetamine accurately recognises the degree of your involvement and your culpability or wrongdoing.

[3]      The more serious charge is that of attempting to pervert the course of justice. In my judgment you were motivated by naivety.  You know that that was a foolish step to take.  Normally that offence attracts a term of imprisonment.  In your case I do not intend to impose that penalty.

[4]      Going very much in your favour are these factors.  First, there are your pleas of guilty.   They amount to a recognition of your wrongdoing and, I hope in your case, a sign that you will attempt to rehabilitate yourself.   Second, there is your previous good character.   You have no criminal convictions.   Third, you are the mother of two dependent children.  Fourth, and of particular relevance, is the support you enjoy from your mother, your uncle and your stepfather.   Your mother has offered to accommodate you at the house she and her husband share at Waimamaku. She says that you have a particularly creative bent; that you have transformed the gardens.  If that is so, I encourage you to take any steps to fulfil your potential.

[5]      You can also thank, as I said before, Mr Blaikie for the result this morning. His realism and support have meant a good deal.  So, too, I appreciate Ms Lummis’ approach to this case.

[6]      You are now free to go.  Please, Ms S  , I ask you to ensure that you do not  appear  before  a  Court  of  law  again  in  your  life.    You  have  been  treated

mercifully today.  Do not abuse the privilege.  Please stand down.

Rhys Harrison J