Rooke v R [2011] NSWCCA 280

Rooke v R [2011] NSWCCA 280

The asserted error about the amount withdrawn would have little or no impact on sentence because, on either calculation, the withdrawals were within approximately $300,000 to $400,000. The sentencing judge's conclusion that the applicant's rehabilitation prospects were not good was justified on the evidence, and the judge was entitled to reject the applicant's late version of events. Having regard to the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's criminal history, offending while on conditional liberty, and comparable authorities, the effective sentence of five years four months with an additional term of two years was within the available range and no lesser sentence was warranted in law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['using a False Instrument With Intent' 'obtaining Money by Deception' 'identity Crime' 'manifest Excess' 'rehabilitation Prospects' 'methadone Program' 'form 1 Offences' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'offending While on Conditional Liberty']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['using a False Instrument With Intent' 'obtaining Money by Deception' 'identity Crime' 'manifest Excess' 'rehabilitation Prospects' 'methadone Program' 'form 1 Offences' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'offending While on Conditional Liberty']

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 Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding that the total amount of cash withdrawn by the applicant was $373,430.00.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in the manner he took into account the applicant's participation in the methadone program when assessing prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by taking into account that the applicant had not provided his version of events to the authorities before giving evidence on sentence.' 'Whether the overall sentence was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The asserted error about the amount withdrawn would have little or no impact on sentence because, on either calculation, the withdrawals were within approximately $300,000 to $400,000. The sentencing judge's conclusion that the applicant's rehabilitation prospects were not good was justified on the evidence, and the judge was entitled to reject the applicant's late version of events. Having regard to the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's criminal history, offending while on conditional liberty, and comparable authorities, the effective sentence of five years four months with an additional term of two years was within the available range and no lesser sentence was warranted in law.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']