R v Whittaker CA146/05

In the case of CA146/05, Irene Rosetta Whittaker appealed against the sentence imposed by the High Court at Christchurch. The appellant was convicted on multiple drug-related charges, including possession of a class A drug (methamphetamine) for the purposes of supply, possession of class B and C drugs for supply, possession of precursor substances, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The appeal focused on the sentence of four years and three months for the possession of methamphetamine for supply. The Court of Appeal considered three factors raised by Ms Whittaker's counsel: the starting point for sentencing, the extent of the discount for her late guilty plea, and the impact of the Department of Corrections' policy on her methadone programme.

The Court of Appeal found that the starting point of five years for the methamphetamine charge was too high, and the appropriate starting point should have been between two and four years. The Court acknowledged that the offence involved was within the lowest category identified in R v Arthur [2005] CRNZ 453. While there was some aggravation due to the timespan of offending and the existence of other drug offences, the Court determined that a starting point of four years would have been sufficient. Regarding the discount for the late guilty plea, the Court of Appeal agreed with the sentencing judge that a late plea of guilty would generally attract a smaller discount. However, the Court of Appeal considered that the appellant's addiction and the personal circumstances should have been given more weight in the discount calculation. The Court also rejected the argument that the Department of Corrections' policy on methadone programmes should have resulted in a lesser sentence for the appellant.

After balancing all the factors, the Court of Appeal determined that a six-month discount would be appropriate, reflecting the matters identified by the sentencing judge, including the late plea of guilty. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal against the sentence of four years and three months, quashed the sentence, and imposed a sentence of three years and six months' imprisonment for the possession of a class A drug for the purposes of supply. All other sentences were confirmed.