R v Egar [2019] NSWDC 445

R v Egar [2019] NSWDC 445

Each offence was objectively serious and within the lower end of the mid-range for s 192E offending because it involved substantial sums, numerous transactions, planning and sophistication, and a gross breach of trust by an employee in a financial role. The offender was entitled to a 25% discount for early guilty pleas and had expressed remorse, but the court was not satisfied that her mental health issues caused the offending or that an Intensive Correction Order would satisfy the purposes of sentencing. General deterrence, denunciation, adequate punishment, recognition of harm, and the totality of criminality required a full-time custodial aggregate sentence of three years, with special...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Two Offences of Dishonestly Obtaining Property by Deception / Sentencing After Early Pleas of Guilty and Committal for Sentence
Outcome
Offender convicted on both counts and sentenced to a full-time custodial aggregate sentence of 3 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months.
Legal Topics
['dishonestly Obtain Property by Deception' 'fraud by Employee' 'breach of Trust' 'aggregate Sentence' 'full Time Custody' 'intensive Correction Order' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['dishonestly Obtain Property by Deception' 'fraud by Employee' 'breach of Trust' 'aggregate Sentence' 'full Time Custody' 'intensive Correction Order' 'special Circumstances']

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 Sentence for Two Offences of Dishonestly Obtaining Property by Deception / Sentencing After Early Pleas of Guilty and Committal for Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for two rolled-up offences under s 192E(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 involving numerous fraudulent transactions against two employers.' 'Whether the objective seriousness of each offence, including the amounts taken, duration, planning, sophistication and breach of trust, required full-time custody.' "Whether the offender's mental health issues, remorse, plea of guilty, limited criminal history and prospects of rehabilitation warranted a community-based sentence or an Intensive Correction Order." 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the statutory ratio between the head sentence and non-parole period.']

Ratio Decidendi

Each offence was objectively serious and within the lower end of the mid-range for s 192E offending because it involved substantial sums, numerous transactions, planning and sophistication, and a gross breach of trust by an employee in a financial role. The offender was entitled to a 25% discount for early guilty pleas and had expressed remorse, but the court was not satisfied that her mental health issues caused the offending or that an Intensive Correction Order would satisfy the purposes of sentencing. General deterrence, denunciation, adequate punishment, recognition of harm, and the totality of criminality required a full-time custodial aggregate sentence of three years, with special...

Court Disposition

Offender convicted on both counts and sentenced to a full-time custodial aggregate sentence of 3 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 18 months.

Orders

  • ['You are convicted of Count 1 and Count 2, namely the two offences pursuant to s 192E(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900, of dishonestly obtain property by deception.' 'I sentence you by way of an aggregate sentence pursuant to s 53A of the CSPA 1999.' 'You are sentenced to a non-parole period of 18 months to date from...