R v King [2023] NSWDC 100

R v King [2023] NSWDC 100

The reports were admitted because the issue was one of weight rather than admissibility, but the untested offender histories were approached guardedly and the alleged childhood sexual abuse and asserted causal connection between mental state and offending were not established. The offending was planned and calculated, involved separate victims and significant sums, and required imprisonment, with count 1 in the mid-range of objective seriousness and counts 2 and 3 in the upper reaches of the low range. After allowing a 25% plea discount, special circumstances, totality, proportionality and delay arising from the earlier 2018 Commonwealth sentence, the Court reduced the aggregate sentence...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Three Charges of Dishonestly Obtaining a Financial Advantage by Deception / Sentence After Guilty Pleas
Outcome
Offender convicted on three charges under s 192E and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.
Legal Topics
['fraud' 'dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage by Deception' 'admissibility and Weight of Psychiatric and Psychological Reports' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggravating Factors' 'totality' 'delay' 'aggregate Sentence' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'evidence'] ['fraud' 'dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage by Deception' 'admissibility and Weight of Psychiatric and Psychological Reports' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggravating Factors' 'totality' 'delay' 'aggregate Sentence' '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 Sentencing for Three Charges of Dishonestly Obtaining a Financial Advantage by Deception / Sentence After Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether psychiatric, psychological and sentencing assessment reports based on untested offender histories were admissible and what weight should be given to them.' 'What objective seriousness attached to three offences of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception involving separate victims and different amounts.' "What weight should be given to the offender's criminal history, mental health, remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, and risk of reoffending." 'How totality, proportionality and delay should affect sentence where a related Commonwealth dishonesty offence committed in the same broad period had already been sentenced in 2018.' 'Whether an Intensive Correction Order was available or appropriate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The reports were admitted because the issue was one of weight rather than admissibility, but the untested offender histories were approached guardedly and the alleged childhood sexual abuse and asserted causal connection between mental state and offending were not established. The offending was planned and calculated, involved separate victims and significant sums, and required imprisonment, with count 1 in the mid-range of objective seriousness and counts 2 and 3 in the upper reaches of the low range. After allowing a 25% plea discount, special circumstances, totality, proportionality and delay arising from the earlier 2018 Commonwealth sentence, the Court reduced the aggregate sentence...

Court Disposition

Offender convicted on three charges under s 192E and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.

Orders

  • ['Of the three charges under s192E the offender is convicted.' 'The offender is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment, noting the indicative sentences and the application of a 25% discount, of a non parole period of 2 ½ years to date from 21 December 2022 and expiring on 20 June 2025 with a balance of term...