- R v D – Client faced various charges of supplying methamphetamine. After considerable analysis of the evidence and negotiation with crown counsel the charges were significantly amended, and the amounts of methamphetamine considerably reduced. Result: The defendant pleaded guilty to amended charges and sentenced to a community-based sentence not a three-four year term of imprisonment. NB: Defence submissions were based on new Court of Appeal guidelines in the sentencing of drug dealing cases which meant that a community-based sentence was an option after the charges and summary of facts were amended.
- R v W (Operation Robot) – Client charged with organised manufacturing of class A drug methamphetamine and conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. After a six-week trial W found not guilty of manufacturing, guilty only of conspiracy.
- R v C (Operation Geta-a-fix) – C charged with three others with conspiracy to manufacture and sell methamphetamine. Defence was that agreement to act had not been finalised. Following two trials and two hung juries case against C dismissed as a result of defence application to stay proceedings.
- R v S and C – Both S and C charged with sophisticated cannabis cultivation operation following police search of their property in West Auckland. Successful application to exclude all evidence (including the whole cannabis crop) discovered on the basis that both accused’s Bill of Rights had been breached due to an unreasonable search conducted by the Police. Legal argument accepted by Judge that there were no reasonable grounds to search the house at the outset. Result: All charges dismissed for want of evidence once court couldn’t rely on inadmissible evidence.
- R v Z – Successful defence of man charged with the importation of class A drug from Middle East into New Zealand. Judge accepted argument that no evidence existed that Z knew drugs were in the package he had been given before entering New Zealand.
- R v H (Operation Pope) – Represented principal offender in major drug operation with 17 other accused charged with major drug offences. Successful challenge made to admissibility of client’s statement to the Police on the basis of Police unfairness, a breach of the client’s Bill of Rights and improper offers being made by the interviewing officer. Result: Major charges withdrawn without H’s original statement to rely upon.
- R v B (Operation Tomahawk) – B and seven others charged with manufacture of methamphetamine and selling cannabis. Acquittal secured by way of successful application at the end of the Crown case due to insufficient evidence against B.
- R v O – Client charged with possession for supply of methamphetamine and cultivation of cannabis. The Police search of the defendant’s house was challenged as being unlawful. Result: All evidence seized by the Police was ruled inadmissible and subsequently all charges were withdrawn by the Crown.
- R v P – Client charged with possession of a large amount of methamphetamine for supply after a large packet of drugs was found in his car. Result: Following a successful challenge of the Police search of the defendant’s vehicle, the evidence found was ruled inadmissible and an acquittal was secured due to lack of evidence.