Police v Swann [2016] NZDC 16565 (25 August 2016)

Last Updated: 22 December 2016

_{EDITORIAL NOTE: NO SUPPRESSION APPLIED.}

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH

CRI-2016-009-006076 [2016] NZDC 16565

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Prosecutor

v

JAYDEN SWANN

_Defendant

Hearing:	25 August 2016
Appearances:	B Blackmore for the Prosecutor D Matthews for the Defendant
Judgment:	25 August 2016

_{NOTES OF JUDGE D J L SAUNDERS ON SENTENCING}

[1] Jayden Swann, you are before the Court for sentence today in relation to charges of burglary, driving while suspended and possession of a knife.

[2] The most significant of those offences is the burglary that occurred back in January up in the Nelson area where a house was entered and electronic items taken and those are the items that I have referred to just a moment ago when I talked about the distress to complainants. While the hardware itself can often be replaced through Noel Leeming or Harvey Norman or any of the other retailers. What cannot be replaced is what was on their software, namely the photos and what included memories of prior events that they wished to keep. Those items were not recovered and there is a claim for reparation of $1500 that is made for the insurance company

_{which has paid out to the resident who suffered that household burglary.}

NEW ZEALAND POLICE v JAYDEN SWANN [2016] NZDC 16565 [25 August 2016]

[3] You then arrived in Christchurch and in May over a period from around about

11 May there were a number of garages in Papanui in the main entered into where items were taken and then pawned at the pawn shop or Cash Converters and small amounts of reparation are sought in respect of each of those.

[4] On 8 June when you were suspended from driving you were apprehended driving and then there was the possession of the knife under the Summary Offences Act 1981 and I accept that in relation to that you may well have carried a knife normally in your duties as a fisherman but again there are real obligations upon people not to be carrying knives in public places for reasons that I hope are perfectly apparent to you. Too often young men resort to a knife when they get into a fight or dangerous situation it leads to often very tragic consequences.

[5] The view that I have taken is that the starting point for sentencing today should be the burglary in Nelson. The High Court have said on more than one occasion that a residential burglary of a dwelling house, even in daylight hours, can command a starting point in the range of 18 months to two years’ imprisonment. I adopt 18 months as a starting point in relation to that particular burglary. When I talk of a starting point that is not the end point, it is simply a starting point before other offences are taken into account and then the credits for the guilty plea and remorse that you have shown.

[6] So far as the burglaries that then occurred of garages here in Christchurch I adopt a further starting point in relation to those. There will be a starting point in relation to those of 12 months imprisonment and that effectively takes the sentence to one of 30 months. From that you are entitled to full credit for the guilty pleas that were entered in relation to these matters and the saving of the costs of trial. I allow eight months credit in relation to that bringing the matter back to one of 22 months.

[7] So far as the driving while suspended is concerned two months imprisonment would be the maximum that would be considered appropriate if that was dealt with alone and the possession of the knife one month imprisonment.

[8] I intend that those be concurrent with each other but cumulative on the

22 months taking the sentence to one of 24 months.

[9] You are entitled to half release. In other words when you have served

12 months you are subject to release and that will be on conditions that you undertake such further programmes, counselling and treatment including the assessment for drug and alcohol matters as may be directed by the probation officer. I believe there is sufficient time left within your sentence today to allow for you to continue to address drug and alcohol issues while in custody and there is a drug and alcohol programme available at both the Christchurch Prison or if you are prepared to transfer to Otago there is a shorter intensive three months programme that can be undertaken there. It is absolutely vital that you undertake treatment in relation to that before you are released because the driver behind these offences was of course feeding your drug and alcohol addiction. So you need to address that before you are released.

[10] There will be reparation ordered imposed, $1500 to IEC in relation to the Stoke burglary, $25 on CRN 8301, $150 on CRN 8302, on CRN 8303 $20, on CRN 8304 $80 and CRN 8305 also $80.

[11] So in summary you have a sentence which does not exceed the two year mark, that does not mean that you will be subject to seeing the Parole Board. You are subject to release at one-half and you will have the ability to address your offending in custody but then will be on release conditions.

[12] I should record that although Mr Matthews did ask me to consider the least restrictive sentence of home detention I consider that that would not be appropriate in your case because of the nature of the offending, the length for which you would be on a bracelet and the fact that the immediate need is for you to have the treatment that is available within the prison for drug and alcohol addiction.

D J L Saunders

District Court Judge