R v Smith

[2018] NZHC 2118

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA ROHE

CRI-2017-091-000902

[2018] NZHC 2118

THE QUEEN

v

GEOFFREY WAYNE SMITH

Counsel:

E M Light for Crown

M N Pecotic for Defendant

Sentence:

17 August 2018

NOTES ON SENTENCE OF COLLINS J

Introduction

[1]Mr Smith, you appear for a sentencing on the following charges:

(1)two charges of supplying methamphetamine;1

(2)one representative charge of supplying methamphetamine;2

(3)one charge of possession of methamphetamine;3

(4)one charge of unlawfully possessing a firearm;4 and

1      Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(1)(c) and (2)(a); maximum penalty life imprisonment.

2      Section 6(1)(c) and (2)(a); maximum penalty life imprisonment.

3      Section 7(1)(a) and (2)(a); maximum penalty six months’ imprisonment.

4      Arms Act 1983, s 45; maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment.

R v SMITH [2018] NZHC 2118 [17 August 2018]

(5)one charge of unlawfully possessing ammunition.5

[2]This morning I will:

(1)set out your offending;

(2)outline the appropriate starting point for that offending;

(3)explain the adjustments that I will make to that starting point; and

(4)give you your final sentence.

Summary of offending

[3]        The charges result from a police operation code-named “Operation Walnut” which commenced in November 2016. That investigation targeted the commercial supply of methamphetamine in the Wellington region.

[4]        A surveillance device warrant allowed police to intercept private communications and carry out visual surveillance of two principal targets, Mr Blance and Mr Berkland. They were purchasing kilogram quantities of methamphetamine from Auckland-based suppliers. Mr Blance and Mr Berkland would then on-supply the methamphetamine to a number of associates in their distribution networks. Most of the offending took place from an address in Coates Street in Tawa. Associates would then on-supply the methamphetamine further. You were one of the Auckland- based suppliers.

[5]        You had an associate who was involved in the importation of methamphetamine. You had a disposable phone – referred to as a burner phone – that you used to contact this associate. You referred to this associate as your “partner” in an intercepted communication with Mr Blance.

5      Arms Act 1983, s 45; maximum penalty four years’ imprisonment.

[6]        Analysis of your phone communications also revealed that when Ms Phillips, the other Auckland-based supplier, wanted to supply her own customers she would contract you so that you could obtain more methamphetamine from your importer.

[7]        You used burner phones to contact Mr Blance about methamphetamine supplies and you changed these phones periodically. When Mr Blance placed an order, you would travel from Auckland with Ms Phillips to a predetermined location in order to carry out the supply.    During the period of the  investigation Mr Blance and     Mr Berkland purchased at least 15 kilograms of methamphetamine from you, at an estimated total cost of $5,250,000. You received payment for your involvement, and the balance was paid to your importer.

[8]        On the night of 2 March 2017, you and Ms Phillips drove to Wellington to meet with Mr Blance. You arrived at the Coates Street address early the…