Richards v R [2019] NSWCCA 199

Richards v R [2019] NSWCCA 199

Leave to appeal against sentence was refused because none of the 13 grounds disclosed arguable sentencing error or miscarriage of justice. The sentencing judge's remarks were cogent, comprehensive and reasoned; the factual findings were open on the agreed facts and evidence; the applicant was not entitled to a further assistance discount; the expert and subjective material had been considered; findings as to remorse, rehabilitation, breach of trust and special circumstances were open; there was no relevant delay; and the sentence was not manifestly excessive, but lenient in light of the sustained breach of trust and substantial financial loss.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['dishonestly Obtain a Financial Advantage by Deception' 'leave to Appeal Against Sentence' 'extension of Time' 'manifest Excess' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'assistance to Authorities' 'mental Health and Gambling Disorder in Sentencing' 'remorse and Rehabilitation' 'breach of Trust' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['dishonestly Obtain a Financial Advantage by Deception' 'leave to Appeal Against Sentence' 'extension of Time' 'manifest Excess' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'assistance to Authorities' 'mental Health and Gambling Disorder in Sentencing' 'remorse and Rehabilitation' 'breach of Trust' '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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to bring her application for leave to appeal.' "Whether any of the asserted grounds disclosed error in the sentencing judge's treatment of the facts, amounts, dates, aggravating factors, expert evidence, mitigating factors, remorse, rehabilitation, special circumstances or delay." 'Whether the applicant was entitled to any discount for assistance to authorities beyond the 25% discount for her early guilty plea.' 'Whether fresh or new evidence and allegations of incompetent legal representation demonstrated a miscarriage of justice.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive or whether a lesser sentence was warranted in law.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal against sentence was refused because none of the 13 grounds disclosed arguable sentencing error or miscarriage of justice. The sentencing judge's remarks were cogent, comprehensive and reasoned; the factual findings were open on the agreed facts and evidence; the applicant was not entitled to a further assistance discount; the expert and subjective material had been considered; findings as to remorse, rehabilitation, breach of trust and special circumstances were open; there was no relevant delay; and the sentence was not manifestly excessive, but lenient in light of the sustained breach of trust and substantial financial loss.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Grant the applicant an extension of time to bring her application for leave to appeal.' 'Refuse leave to appeal.']