Police v Mills [2017] NZDC 7644 (11 April 2017)

Last Updated: 31 August 2017

_{EDITORIAL NOTE: NO SUPPRESSION APPLIED.}

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT PUKEKOHE

CRI-2016-057-001780 [2017] NZDC 7644

NEW ZEALAND POLICE

Prosecutor

v

LUKE THOMAS MILLS

_Defendant

Hearing:	11 April 2017
Appearances:	G Bardsley for the Prosecutor P Masani for the Defendant
Judgment:	11 April 2017

_{NOTES OF JUDGE G T WINTER ON SENTENCING}

[1] Mr Mills, you appear for sentence on two burglaries, three receivings, possession of utensils for methamphetamine and one minor driving charge.

[2] The circumstances of such a large amount of offending I will only summarise, but I will have a copy of the amended summary of facts attached to your sentencing notes.

[3] Generally what happened though is in respect of one of the receiving charges, a water blaster built onto a trailer was stolen from Patumahoe. It is said and you accept that you received that from an unnamed person knowing that it was stolen. A short time later an oven and two air conditioning units were taken from a house in Pokeno which is the last stages of its construction. That was units that were valued

_{for the oven $4249 and the air conditioning unit somewhere between two and $4000.}

NEW ZEALAND POLICE v LUKE THOMAS MILLS [2017] NZDC 7644 [11 April 2017]

[4] In terms of the further receiving some days later after another property had been burgled, a fishing rod and a child’s quad bike and a small LPG bottle with a combined value of $2000 were purchased by you from an unknown associate.

[5] In terms of the burglary on 25 October, it is said that you went to a residence in Isabella Drive, Pukekohe. You jemmied open the side garage door. Once inside, there was a rough search and an adult, a motorbike valued at $15,000, motor cross boots valued at $700 and a motor bike stand valued at $200 were taken. The following day, 26 October, it said you went to Ray Small Drive and whilst you were at that address, you went inside a shed and took adult motor cross bikes and a Yamaha motor bike with a combined value of $27,000. You put those onto a custom built trailer valued at $3000 and you used your vehicle to tow the trailer from the address.

[6] A large volume of stolen property from the burglary was recovered after a search warrant was executed at your address. It was as part of that process that the small methamphetamine pipe was discovered. The driving charge was a more minor offence with an expected factual summary of stop and apprehension about your inability to drive.

[7] The pre-sentence report about you Mr Mills is in some respects bleak, but in others, quite positive. The bleak side of it is that it recalls your history of dishonesty related offending and breach of community-based sentences on four occasions since

2013. There were in your history, five convictions for violence and seven driving related convictions. You attribute your offending and I accept that attribution is related to your methamphetamine addiction.

[8] So the purpose of my sentencing today is to hold you to account for the harm done as a result of these burglaries and receivings, and to deter you, and others by the sentence I impose, but also to offer you the opportunity to use this sentence as a platform to gain a cure to your methamphetamine drug addiction and move on because if that is not addressed, you will remain at high risk of re-offending when in the company of like-minded people who might have similar addictions and who are

leading similar lifestyles because of in any sense of it, the burglaries and receivings were undertaken to feed the habit that you have.

[9] I have considered the sentencings options. An electronically monitored option does not appear available for you at the moment. It is important that we draw a line under your offending by this sentence. In that regard, I have not only had very helpful submissions from your lawyer, but also I have read with interest your letter to me where you accept responsibility for this offending, correspondence from the prison indicating that you are waitlisted for alcohol and drug addiction programmes, and I note and will pass through the probation service and or the police your letters of apology to each of the victims.

[10] I have to construct a sentence, bearing in mind the purposes and principles of Sentencing Act 2002 which is the law under which Judges’ sentence people. I have referred to some of the principles such as holding you to account, promoting in you a sense of responsibility, providing an interest for the victims, and to assist you in rehabilitation and reintegration.

[11] I have, of course, revisited this morning the well-known cases of Senior v P

HC Christchurch CRI-A13900 19 December 2000 and R v Nguyen CA 110 2001

2 July 2001. At paragraph 17 of that sentence appeal, the Court considered some aggravating features of burglary and it is around your burglaries that I must construct the sentence because that is the lead offending. I have to consider the degree of planning and sophistication and the nature of the premises entered, the kind and value of the property stolen, the extent of the offending where multiple burglaries are involved and the damage done.

[12] In my view, this can be summarised in this way. Firstly, the burglaries involved domestic residences. Secondly, on any sense of it, the items that were stolen were highly valuable. Thirdly, there was a considerable financial loss to the victims and lastly, there is the extent of the offending. I am satisfied indeed, your offending falls at the top end of category 1 and the low to middle end of category 2 of the categories described in Senior v P.

[13] I have kept in mind when assessing the starting point, not only the submissions of your counsel and the index counsels provided, such as Gibbs v Police and Paul v Police, but are also the practical situation you face were the burglary charges form the lead offence. Also I have to take into account that you committed the offences whilst you were subject to a sentence of community detention, the fact also that you have previous convictions and there will need to be an uplift, of course, for the other offences which while reduced from burglary to receiving charges still describe very serious offending for that category of crime.

[14] You have heard my discussions this morning with your counsel and the learned prosecutor. They are not far apart on the starting point. It has to be

30 months’ imprisonment on the burglaries. This was offending whilst you were subject to a sentence, and I am satisfied that four months has to be added making the aggravated total of 32 months.

[15] There has to be a recognition that on the receiving charges which even at a modest calculation would see property obtained by you in dishonest circumstances having a value of over $10,000 against the seven year starting point a six month uplift is appropriate taking the total to 40 months. I agree with your learned counsel and the prosecutor that the drugs and driving charges are minor and seen together a two month uplift would respect consistency. That takes it to 42 months.

[16] The learned prosecutor urged a two to four month increase for your previous, but looking at this on a totality basis, I am satisfied that only a two month uplift is appropriate taking it to 44 months.

[17] The nub of your sentence calculation Mr Mills lies in the difference on the discounts that might be given because of mitigation. I am persuaded in the end that although you entered your plea after not guilty pleas and at case review hearing following several remands for you to obtain instructions throughout, you have demonstrated a willingness to look at rehabilitation, and so I am satisfied that a full discount is appropriate of 25 percent which takes the total to 33 months’ imprisonment. Then there has to be added onto that something for your remorse. I am satisfied that that is quite genuine. I am satisfied that with the good support of

your family well represented here in Court today you might be at a point in your life where you are willing to attempt at least some rehabilitation to rid yourself of the scourge of methamphetamine addiction. For that reason, I am satisfied that something approaching a further 10 percent discount is appropriate. That in my mind also addresses the issue of the need to impose the least restrictive option and a final totality assessment.

[18] The sentence of the Court is, therefore, one of 30 months’ imprisonment.

[19] I am going to leave it to the parole board to set the terms of your release, but clearly, I invite the Board to consider the need for rehabilitative options and particularly, regarding your methamphetamine drug addiction and lifestyle.

[20] The sentence of the Court then sir is 30 months’ imprisonment.

[21] An order for destruction is made.

[22] All sentences will be concurrent to the burglary charge.

G T Winter

District Court Judge