R v Einfeld [2009] NSWSC 119

R v Einfeld [2009] NSWSC 119

The court held that both offences were objectively serious offences against public justice requiring full-time imprisonment. The perjury was deliberate, premeditated, planned, committed for the prisoner's own benefit to overcome a speeding charge, and aggravated by his legal career and use of the title Justice. The perverting offence involved substantial separate and more serious criminality in the planned preparation and provision to police of a 20 page statement containing many knowingly false assertions to avoid conviction for perjury. Mitigating factors, including prior good character, guilty pleas, contrition, health, age, extra-curial punishment and likely protective custody,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Sentence / Remarks on Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
The prisoner was sentenced to full-time imprisonment for both offences, with the sentence for perverting the course of justice partly cumulative on the sentence for perjury, and was ordered to be released on parole on 19 March 2011.
Legal Topics
['perjury' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'offences Against Public Justice' 'guilty Pleas' 'extra Curial Punishment' 'protective Custody' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['perjury' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'offences Against Public Justice' 'guilty Pleas' 'extra Curial Punishment' 'protective Custody' '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

Sentence / Remarks on Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentences should be imposed for perjury under s 327 of the Crimes Act and perverting the course of justice under s 319 of the Crimes Act.' 'Whether penalties other than imprisonment were appropriate.' 'Whether any term of imprisonment should be served by full-time custody or an alternative such as a suspended sentence, home detention or periodic detention.' 'Whether the sentence for perverting the course of justice should be concurrent with, cumulative on, or partly cumulative on the sentence for perjury.' 'Whether special circumstances should be found under s 44(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that both offences were objectively serious offences against public justice requiring full-time imprisonment. The perjury was deliberate, premeditated, planned, committed for the prisoner's own benefit to overcome a speeding charge, and aggravated by his legal career and use of the title Justice. The perverting offence involved substantial separate and more serious criminality in the planned preparation and provision to police of a 20 page statement containing many knowingly false assertions to avoid conviction for perjury. Mitigating factors, including prior good character, guilty pleas, contrition, health, age, extra-curial punishment and likely protective custody,...

Court Disposition

The prisoner was sentenced to full-time imprisonment for both offences, with the sentence for perverting the course of justice partly cumulative on the sentence for perjury, and was ordered to be released on parole on 19 March 2011.

Orders

  • ['For the offence of perjury, sentenced to a non-parole period of imprisonment of one year two months commencing on 20 March 2009 and expiring on 19 May 2010 and a balance of the term of seven months commencing on 20 May 2010 and expiring on 19 December 2010.' 'For the offence of perverting the course of justice,...