New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Drug offences

Legal area

Court

9 Mar 2023

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v SWARBRICK [2023] NZHC 430

Citation

[2023] NZHC 430
Court

High Court

Given the combination of physical evidence from the search, intercepted communications arranging drug sales, the denomination and location of cash, unexplained substantial cash deposits in the respondent's bank account, and the respondent's convictions for supply-related offences, it was more probable than not that the $25,305 was derived from supply of methamphetamine and/or cannabis and therefore constituted tainted property obliging the Court to make an assets forfeiture order under s50(1).
6 Mar 2023

BOLEA v THE KING [2023] NZCA 39

Citation

[2023] NZCA 39
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held the Judge did not err: in this case deportation and the associated process are properly regarded as consequences of the offending rather than of the conviction because immigration decision-makers will consider the gravity of the offending and personal circumstances; the High Court correctly applied the s106/s107 proportionality test and was entitled to decline a discharge without conviction; the appeal is dismissed.
28 Jul 2022

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v DEVERELL [2022] NZHC 1839

Citation

[2022] NZHC 1839
Court

High Court

The court was satisfied on the material before it that there were reasonable grounds to believe the respondents had unlawfully benefited from criminal activity, that they had interests in the property sought to be restrained, and that there was a risk of disposal if notice were given; accordingly, and because s 34 authorised entry and seizure by Police and Official Assignee staff to enable statutory functions, the interim restraining orders and the s 34 entry/seizure order were properly granted.
3 Dec 2021

MOFFATT v R [2021] NZHC 3297

Citation

[2021] NZHC 3297
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court's starting point, firearms uplift and global 15% discount for background and addiction were within the available range and not manifestly excessive; because the offender's background and addiction were heavily interlinked a global approach to discounting was justified, and the appeal was dismissed.
25 Jun 2021

TREGOWETH v R [2021] NZCA 311

Citation

[2021] NZCA 311
Court

Court of Appeal

It was wrong in principle to impose an uplift for methamphetamine found on the appellant in custody where the Crown offered no evidence and it was accepted he had not intended to smuggle it into prison; the three month uplift produced a manifestly unjust sentence and was therefore quashed, with the substituted sentence reflecting the agreed starting point less the same mitigations.
7 Oct 2020

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE v JONES & ORS [2020] NZHC 2628

Citation

[2020] NZHC 2628
Court

High Court

The evidence provided reasonable grounds to believe the respondents had benefited from significant criminal activity and that the identified property interests were tainted; there was a real risk of disposal if notice were given, thereby justifying a without‑notice interim restraining order under s22 CPRA 2009 for seven days.
21 Sept 2020

BARAKAT v R [2020] NZCA 440

Citation

[2020] NZCA 440
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court upheld the District Court: the appellant received timely and appropriate advice, had a support person, provided signed instructions and made informed decisions to seek and accept a sentence indication; there were no exceptional circumstances or legal errors sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice warranting withdrawal of guilty pleas.
4 Dec 2019

BAIRDS v POLICE [2019] NZHC 3181

Citation

[2019] NZHC 3181
Court

High Court

The High Court held the District Court did not err: the starting point and total sentence were within the permissible range for this level of commercial cannabis offending, the Judge reasonably assessed role and mitigation, the uplift for failing to appear and offending while on home detention was somewhat high but not sufficient to make the overall sentence manifestly excessive, and available evidence did not establish addiction as the primary driver of the offending; therefore the appeal was dismissed and sentence upheld.
8 Mar 2019

KALWYN GEORGE KERSHAW v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2019] NZHC 379

Citation

[2019] NZHC 379
Court

High Court

The High Court found the offending fell at the lower end of band three under Nuku because of the combination of aggravating factors (weapon use, head wound, gang-related conduct). Applying analogy to Grimshaw-Jones, the correct starting point for the lead wounding offending is two years eight months, plus an appropriate uplift for prior convictions (assessed at six months) producing a three years two months starting point, reduced by 25% for the guilty plea to two years four-and-a-half months for the lead offences; with cumulative and concurrent sentences considered the total sentence imposed…
29 May 2018

POLICE v LADBROOK [2018] NZHC 1227

Citation

[2018] NZHC 1227
Court

High Court

The Court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the respondent unlawfully benefited from significant criminal activity, the respondent failed to rebut the presumed value of benefit adopted by the Commissioner, the maximum recoverable amount was fixed at $209,025, and undue hardship was not established; therefore profit forfeiture orders must be made in respect of the specified assets.