Hudson v R [2016] NSWCCA 278

Hudson v R [2016] NSWCCA 278

The sentencing judge did not err. He did not purport to apply s 21A(2)(n) when referring to a level of planning, and the finding of a level of planning was open because the applicant repeatedly used valueless cheques and false statements to gain time and delay foreclosure. The finding of significant overall criminality was open given the total value of the cheques, the actual losses caused to victims, and the moral culpability involved. Delay was taken into account, particularly through the applicant's rehabilitation, and the sentence imposed was modest in all the circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage' 'make and Use False Instrument' 'planning' 'delay' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage' 'make and Use False Instrument' 'planning' 'delay' 'objective Seriousness' 'general Deterrence']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred in concluding that the applicant's conduct involved a level of planning." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in concluding that delay from the offending to sentence was not significant.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding a significant level of overall criminality.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err. He did not purport to apply s 21A(2)(n) when referring to a level of planning, and the finding of a level of planning was open because the applicant repeatedly used valueless cheques and false statements to gain time and delay foreclosure. The finding of significant overall criminality was open given the total value of the cheques, the actual losses caused to victims, and the moral culpability involved. Delay was taken into account, particularly through the applicant's rehabilitation, and the sentence imposed was modest in all the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be granted.' 'The appeal be dismissed.']