The Queen v Matijevic, Bonita Matijevic, Bonita v The Queen [1997] FCA 992

The Queen v Matijevic, Bonita Matijevic, Bonita v The Queen [1997] FCA 992

The cross-appeal failed because, on the whole of the evidence, it was open to the jury to find beyond reasonable doubt that the Rockhampton travel had no legitimate official purpose and was dishonestly charged to the Commonwealth, and the challenged cross-examination about the earlier movement requisition forms was relevant to state of mind and did not require discharge of the jury. The Crown appeal succeeded because the sentencing order was not in a form permitted by s 19B and, in any event, a fraud on the Government by a senior public officer was not trivial, was not committed under extenuating circumstances, and required general deterrence, so s 19B was inappropriate. Convictions were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 1997
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Leniency of Sentence and Cross Appeal Against Conviction From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Cross-appeal dismissed. Crown appeal allowed. Orders purporting to be made under s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) quashed. Conviction entered on each count and the respondent released without passing sentence upon giving security by recognizance.
Legal Topics
['defrauding the Commonwealth' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'discharge of Jury' 'no Conviction Order Under S 19 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'recognizance Under S 20 of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'general Deterrence' 'public Trust']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['defrauding the Commonwealth' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdict' 'discharge of Jury' 'no Conviction Order Under S 19 B of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'recognizance Under S 20 of the Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'general Deterrence' 'public Trust']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Leniency of Sentence and Cross Appeal Against Conviction From the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory." 'Whether the trial judge erred in failing to discharge the jury after cross-examination suggested fraudulent conduct outside the dates specified in the indictment.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by declining to proceed to conviction and purporting to make orders under s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).' 'What sentence should be imposed if the Crown appeal succeeded.']

Ratio Decidendi

The cross-appeal failed because, on the whole of the evidence, it was open to the jury to find beyond reasonable doubt that the Rockhampton travel had no legitimate official purpose and was dishonestly charged to the Commonwealth, and the challenged cross-examination about the earlier movement requisition forms was relevant to state of mind and did not require discharge of the jury. The Crown appeal succeeded because the sentencing order was not in a form permitted by s 19B and, in any event, a fraud on the Government by a senior public officer was not trivial, was not committed under extenuating circumstances, and required general deterrence, so s 19B was inappropriate. Convictions were...

Court Disposition

Cross-appeal dismissed. Crown appeal allowed. Orders purporting to be made under s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) quashed. Conviction entered on each count and the respondent released without passing sentence upon giving security by recognizance.

Orders

  • ['The cross-appeal is dismissed.' 'The appeal is allowed and the orders purporting to be made under s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 are quashed.' 'In lieu thereof a conviction is entered on each count; the respondent is to be released upon her giving security without surety by recognizance in the sum of $500.00 to be...