R v Waters - [2013] NZHC 2604

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

CRI 2012-069-251
[2013] NZHC 2604

THE QUEEN

v

JEFFREY WATERS

Hearing:

4 October 2013

Appearances:

R Douch for Crown

H Leabourn for accused

Judgment:

4 October 2013

SENTENCING REMARKS OFALLAN J

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitor Hamilton H Leabourn Auckland

R v WATERS [2013] NZHC 2604 [4 October 2013]

Introduction

[1] Mr Waters, you have pleaded guilty to, and appear for sentence on, one count of supplying methamphetamine and one count of possessing a precursor substance with the intention to manufacture methamphetamine from it. The maximum penalty for supplying methamphetamine is life imprisonment, the maximum penalty for possessing a precursor substance is five years imprisonment.

Factual summary

[2] On 11 May 2011, police officers went to your rural address near Cambridge where you lived with your partner and teenage daughter. A search of the property revealed two packages containing ContacNT granules, having a combined weight of 1.07kg. ContacNT contains pseudoephedrine, which at that time was a precursor substance used to manufacture the Class A controlled drug methamphetamine. From that quantity of pseudoephedrine it would be possible to produce between 200 and 300 grams of methamphetamine. Also found at your property was a quantity of iodine, also a precursor substance.

[3] In the ceiling space of your house the police located two bags containing bundles of $20 and $50 notes wrapped in plastic. The total value of the banknotes was
$156,260.

[4] You acknowledged to police that the substance found in the rubbish bin in the kitchen was ContacNT, and that the other substance found was iodine which you said was for use in the treatment of horses. There was no explanation for the presence of the cash.

[5] Your co-offender was Mr Harries. Text messages which passed between you and Mr Harries indicate that between you, you were effecting sales of methamphetamine at a price of $14,000 per ounce. If, as the Crown contends, the sum found in the ceiling was derived from the sale of methamphetamine, it represents the proceeds of sale of about 315 grams.

[6] Following that search you were charged and initially remanded in custody. Eventually however, you were granted electronically monitored bail, with a curfew restricting you to your Cambridge home on a 24 hours a day basis. Somewhat later it emerged that you were maintaining your contact with Mr Harries and your offending was continuing while you were on bail.

[7] In November 2011, Mr Harries was apprehended in a motor car on Karangahape Road, Auckland. He had with him 54 grams of methamphetamine, about 3.5 kg of ContacNT and various other drug dealing indicia. That very large quantity of ContacNT was capable of being used to manufacture between 700 grams and one kg of methamphetamine.

[8] Following Mr Harries apprehension, the police obtained access to text messages between you and Mr Harries, sent between 9 August 2011 and 12 February 2012. Those text messages contained evidence of various occasions on which sales of methamphetamine were made.…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Waters

Details

AGLC: R v Waters [2013] NZHC 2604
Case: [2013] NZHC 2604
Decision Date: 4 October 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the High Court of New Zealand, Jeffrey Waters has been sentenced for supplying methamphetamine and possessing a precursor substance with intent to manufacture it. The maximum penalty for the former is life imprisonment, and for the latter, five years imprisonment. The court heard that on May 11, 2011, police discovered a significant amount of ContacNT granules, containing pseudoephedrine, and iodine, both precursor substances for manufacturing methamphetamine, at Waters' property. Additionally, a large sum of cash was found in his ceiling space. Following this discovery, Waters was charged and initially remanded in custody, but later granted electronically monitored bail, which he violated by continuing his illegal activities.

Waters' legal issues involved determining the appropriate sentence for his involvement in the methamphetamine trade and the mitigating and aggravating factors to be considered. The court had to decide on the starting point for sentencing based on the quantity of drugs involved and Waters' role in the operation, as well as adjustments for personal circumstances and the plea of guilty. The court also considered the impact on Waters' family and his potential for rehabilitation.

The court's reasoning led to a starting point of 12½ years imprisonment, adjusted upwards by 18 months for aggravating factors, including Waters' prior convictions and breach of bail conditions. Mitigating factors such as genuine remorse, family support, and a plea of guilty resulted in a reduction of 20%, leading to an 11-year sentence. The court imposed a minimum period of imprisonment of five years and six months to reflect the seriousness of the offence. Waters was sentenced to 11 years imprisonment for supplying methamphetamine and three years for possessing precursor substances, to be served concurrently.

Orders