R v Pham [2017] NZDC 26255 (17 November 2017)

Last Updated: 12 July 2018

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT NAPIER

CRI-2015-041-000594

[2017] NZDC 26255

THE QUEEN

v

LAN MAI THI PHAM (AKA) LISA PHAM

Hearing:	17 November 2017
Appearances:	C R Walker for the Crown M Pecotic for the Defendant (via AVL)
Judgment:	17 November 2017

NOTES OF JUDGE G A REA ON SENTENCING

[1] Ms Pham, you are appearing for sentence today on a charge of importing methamphetamine. It is a representative charge where you have pleaded guilty to importations between 27 March 2015 and 13 November 2015. You at the time were a Vietnamese National living in New Zealand in Auckland.

[2] In late March 2015, you imported 281 grams of methamphetamine into New Zealand. You were arrested for that in Hawke's Bay in April of 2015. You were given bail and you returned to Auckland where subsequent investigations revealed that you had imported five other packages from Hong Kong, two of those were able to be intercepted and they contained a further amount of methamphetamine in excess of 120 grams.

R v LAN MAI THI PHAM (AKA) LISA PHAM [2017] NZDC 26255 [17 November 2017]

[3] All told, you have been charged with importing 405.4 grams of methamphetamine and that does not take into account the three importations that were not recovered but were similar to the last two. The Crown have said that the sentencing should proceed on the basis of what has been recovered rather than any suggestion that the other packages may also have contained methamphetamine.

[4] You did not plead guilty to this until a very late stage when you received a sentence indication from another Judge who is unable to be here for sentencing today. In the end, the Judge determined that there was a starting point of 10 and a half years’ imprisonment, that there would be a discount of 20 percent for your plea and a nine month discount for the fact that you have been on restrictive bail.

[5] The only reason it seems you were on bail was because of your young children who were born subsequently to this offending. While you are obviously entitled to credit for that, it is an unusual situation, to say the least, that somebody who has been arrested for a major methamphetamine importation, granted bail and then re-offended in the same way, gets bail a second time. But you were fortunate in that you did and you have only gone into custody because of issues around appearances in more recent times.

[6] In addition to the material that was before the Judge that gave you the sentence indication, I have also received some information from the Crown which is of assistance to you and also a comprehensive psychological report from a Ms Vitter which Ms Pecotic has presented on your behalf. There is also the material that you have read out today.

[7] You are involved in importing a significant quantity of methamphetamine. That creates a significant number of victims if it gets into the system on the streets of Auckland or anywhere else in the country and in its own way it has turned you into a victim as well because, for a lengthy period of time, you are going to be deprived of the company of your children and all that that entails.

[8] I have been asked, as a result of the additional information, to reassess the discounts that you are entitled to. The Crown support that approach and I am prepared

to do it; however, it needs to be read in the context of the sentencing. The law is very clear that personal circumstances have very little issue to play when you are dealing with major drug offending and certainly methamphetamine dealing at this level seldom, if ever, attracts personal circumstances to be taken into account.

[9] However, with the combination of the fact that you will have difficulty because you are not a native English speaker, your separation from the children, your past history, I consider that some recognition needs to be made of that. As a result, the starting point is the same as Judge Mackintosh said of 10 and a half years. You are entitled to a deduction for the time that you have spent on restrictive bail, despite the fact that you would normally have been in custody, and that has been set at nine months. I consider that bearing in mind the obligation not to place too high an emphasis on personal circumstances, I can take a further one year from the starting point for mental health issues, the matters referred to by the Crown and the sheer difficulty there will be for you in serving the sentence.

[10] I am told to take into account remorse. That is an extremely difficult concept when you went out and re-offended in such a major way while you were waiting on the first lot of charges to be dealt with. In the end, as I have said, I have set it at one year.

[11] The discounts therefore are 21 months from the 10 and a half years, taking it down to eight years and nine months. You are entitled to the discount for your plea of 20 percent which on that timing was a generous one from Judge Mackintosh and therefore the end sentencing on this charge will be one of seven years’ imprisonment.

G A Rea

District Court Judge