R v Campbell DC Rotorua CRI-2010-063-3508 [2010] NZDC 1370 (27 August 2010)

Last Updated: 3 October 2016

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT ROTORUA

_{CRI-2010-063-003508}

THE QUEEN

v

OLANDO CAMPBELL

Hearing: 27 August 2010

Appearances: S Simmers for the Crown

B Foote for the Prisoner

Judgment: 27 August 2010

_{NOTES OF JUDGE J J WEIR ON SENTENCING}

[1] Mr Campbell, you are appearing for sentence today, in the indictable jurisdiction, on one charge of manufacturing cannabis resin. You are also appearing for sentence on two summary matters, one breach of community work and one breach of conditions of release.

[2] The circumstances around the main charge are that police were carrying out an enquiry at an address where you were residing on an unrelated matter, and emanating from the property was a strong smell of cannabis. They therefore conducted a search pursuant to s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act and, in the

_{kitchen, they located a pot with a layer of cannabis resin inside.}

R V CAMPBELL DC ROT CRI-2010-063-003508 27 August 2010

[3] They searched a vehicle at the address and found 400 grams of cannabis plant material and another 1320 grams of cannabis plant which was being soaked in isopropyl alcohol. That is a process used for the purposes of preparation of cannabis resin.

[4] Annexed to the summary of facts, there is an affidavit prepared by Detective Thompson dealing with comparative values of cannabis and matters of that nature. At the end of the day, having regard to the amount of cannabis plant material, his conclusion was there was about 22½ grams that would have came out at the other end, or 55 capsules of cannabis oil worth about $1650.

[5] The Crown has filed lengthy submissions dealing with the appropriate starting point for offending of this type, and refers to two cases in particular, R v Wainohu (CA359/96, 14 November 1996) and R v Renee (CA276/97,

22 October 1997). Mr Foote has focussed on those two cases, your counsel, as well, and the Crown having considered his submissions, accepts that there should be a starting point perhaps somewhat less than 18 months imprisonment.

[6] In my view, that is an appropriate course to adopt. There is an aggravating feature of course, in that this offending occurred while you were subject to release conditions. That is a matter of fact that this is not unusual for you to breach Court orders. Your previous history confirms that.

[7] You have got a significant previous history littered with breaches of failing to report, failing to answer police bail, breaching community work on numerous occasions. So that the report writer in preparing the report, first of all described you as being polite, congenial and co-operative during your interview. You have suffered from a significantly disadvantaged background and you are remorseful for your offending on this occasion. But I have to weigh that up against your response to community based sentences.

[8] The report writer refers to the fact that the degree of drug dependence report is alarming and it is concerning that you are prepared to commit offences to obtain drugs, and by producing drugs.

[9] The report writer describes your response to community based sentences over the past 10 years as absolutely appalling, little sign of compliance, and your sentence has been marked with warnings, offending while on sentence, failure to attend drug and alcohol counselling and matters of that nature.

[10] You are rated as being at high risk of re-offending and there appears to be little sign of any decrease in your offending.

[11] You obviously were offside with that report writer. The report writer refers to numerous events of non-compliance with community based sentence and refers to a typical note written in April 2008, which said:

“Olando was originally released on conditions for 186 days. His response to that sentence was shocking. Right from the outset, he reported under the influence of some substance. He would not give his correct address and his goals were to set up his own P lab and other awful suggestions. It was not long before he re-offended.”

[12] I have got to take account of that when I see how I am going to deal with you at the end of the day, because regardless of what your relationship was with that report writer, what I have got to look at is all of your breaches and the fact that you know you have not complied with conditions of release. You have been dealt with today on breach of conditions of release.

[13] Mr Campbell, just briefly, the sentence of imprisonment is going to be relatively short, but it is going to be imprisonment because you have got to learn that you just cannot carry on this way, you cannot carry on breaching your conditions of release, because if you do, then back you go on every occasion.

[14] Now at the end of the day, I have determined that the starting point insofar as your offending is concerned should be one of 15 months, which I reduce to

10 months imprisonment to acknowledge your plea of guilty.

[15] In addition, in relation to both the breach of community work and the breach of release conditions, you are convicted and sentenced to one month on each, and that is cumulative, which makes a total of 12 months imprisonment.

[16] Your sentence of community work is cancelled and you are to be subject to the conditions of release referred to in the probation officer’s report. Those general and special conditions will apply for a period of six months from the end sentence date.

[17] Now, Mr Campbell, you need to realise that Court orders are there for a specific purpose, so that if you do not comply with them, you are going to finish up getting into trouble. Those conditions of release are there to assist you. You do not have to worry about the community work anymore, but you need to do your time and then comply with your conditions of release. They are there to try and help you keep out of trouble.

J J Weir

District Court Judge