Uncles v The King - [2023] NZHC 102

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE

CRI-2022-483-011

[2023] NZHC 102

BETWEEN
STACEY JESSICA UNCLES

Appellant

AND

THE KING

Respondent

Hearing:
11 October 2022 and supplementary submissions on 18 and

27 January 2023

Appearances:

L A Scott and R E O’Hagan for the Appellant J C H Liu for the Respondent

Judgment:

3 February 2023

JUDGMENT OF PALMER J

Solicitors
Quay Legal, Wellington
Wilkinson Smith Lawyers, Whanganui

UNCLES v THE KING [2023] NZHC 102 [3 February 2023]

What happened?

[1] Ms Stacey Uncles pleaded guilty to two charges of possession of methamphetamine for the purpose of supply, cultivation of cannabis, and possession of methamphetamine utensils. These offences are punishable by up to life imprisonment, seven years’ and one year’s imprisonment respectively. There were two sets of offending:

(a)In Waiouru, at around 7.25 am on 3 May 2018, the Police executed a search warrant at Ms Uncles’ address and found 22g of methamphetamine, $7,170 in cash, electronic sales, zip lock bags, tick books, a small cannabis plant, multiple cell phones and, in Ms Uncles’ vehicle, a 12-gauge shotgun.

(b)While Ms Uncles was on bail in Palmerston North she committed further offending, between 1 and 7 February 2019. The summary of facts on which she was sentenced states:

On 1 February 2019, a surveillance device warrant was authorised to intercept the private communications of the defendant’s associate Kenny FUNG via any cellphone operated by him. A warrant was also obtained to track the movements of his cellphone.

…

FUNG used the defendant’s money to broker a deal with an unknown Asian male and purchased half a kilogram of methamphetamine.

On hearing about the purchase the defendant demanded FUNG return to Palmerston North and threatened him with violence.

On FUNG’s return to Palmerston North, the defendant told him to put the methamphetamine in her letterbox which he did at about 4.30am on 6 February 2019.

At about 12.50pm on 7 February 2019, police executed a search warrant at the defendant’s address.

A subsequent search of her bedroom located a snaplock bag containing approximately 27.7 grams of methamphetamine on the bed, a smaller snaplock bag containing 851 milligrams

of methamphetamine, $1250 cash, a set of digital scales and empty ziplock bags.

In a tool bag on the floor of the defendant’s bedroom was a snaplock container. Inside there were six snaplock bags, containing between 6.8 grams of methamphetamine and 28 grams of methamphetamine. The combined weight of the methamphetamine in the snaplock bags was 76.7grams.

On 7 February 2019, FUNG was located in an inner city carpark by police.

…

A search of the vehicle located a pottle of methamphetamine in the driver’s side door.

This contained approximately 14 grams of methamphetamine.

Under the driver’s seat was a small black bag.

This contained a snaplock bag with approximately 10 grams of methamphetamine …

[2] On 7 August 2020, in the District Court at Whanganui, Judge P P Crayton sentenced Ms Uncles.1 In traversing the…

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 Uncles v The King

Details

AGLC: Uncles v The King [2023] NZHC 102
Case: [2023] NZHC 102
Decision Date: 3 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Stacey Jessica Uncles appealed against her sentence for drug-related offences, arguing that it was manifestly excessive. The High Court considered whether the sentencing judge had made a material error in assessing her role in the offending and the amount of methamphetamine involved. The court found that the sentencing judge correctly assessed the amount of methamphetamine involved in the offending, which was the basis for the starting point of the sentence. The disparity in the starting points between Ms Uncles and her co-offender, Mr Fung, was explained by the difference in their respective roles in the offending. Ms Uncles played a significant role in the offending, as she directed Mr Fung by pressure, influence, intimidation, or reward and was motivated primarily by financial advantage. The court concluded that the Judge made no material error in sentencing Ms Uncles and dismissed the appeal.

Orders