Court of Criminal Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
- Summary available
Medium Neutral Citation: Fineff v R [2024] NSWCCA 102 Hearing dates: 3 June 2024 Decision date: 17 June 2024 Before: Leeming JA at [1];
Davies J at [64];
N Adams J at [65]Decision: 1. Grant leave to appeal.
2. Dismiss the appeal.
Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – aggregate sentence of 9 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 4 months for 12 offences of dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception – whether sentence manifestly excessive – highly favourable subjective case – early plea of guilty – assistance to authorities – total fraud in excess of $3.3 million – offending took place over some 3½ years – many victims elderly – substantial financial harm and emotional distress inflicted on victims – consideration of comparable cases – appeal dismissed
Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 1041G
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 192E
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 16BA
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 53A
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5
Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), s 6AAA
Cases Cited: Abellanoza v R [2021] NSWCCA 4
AC v R (2023) 111 NSWLR 514; [2023] NSWCCA 133
Barnes v Addy (1874) LR 9 Ch App 244
Berryman v R [2017] NSWCCA 297
Davidson v R [2022] NSWCCA 153; 300 A Crim R 214
Nakhl v R (Cth) [2020] NSWCCA 201
Obeid v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 155; [2017] NSWCCA 221
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Gavin Daniel Fineff (Applicant)
Crown (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
TF Woods (Applicant)
J Styles (Crown)
XD LAW
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW)
File Number(s): 2021/00128389 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court
- Jurisdiction:
- Criminal
- Citation:
- Date of Decision:
- 21 April 2023
- Before:
- O’Brien AM DCJ
- File Number(s):
- 2021/00128389
JUDGMENT
-
LEEMING JA: Mr Gavin Daniel Fineff seeks leave to appeal from an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 9 years, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 4 months, imposed by the District Court following his guilty pleas to 12 counts of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception contrary to s 192E(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). Each offence carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. There were 12 individual victims who had trusted him with their savings and investments, from whom he took amounts of between $60,000 and $745,000 over a period from October 2016 until March 2020. The total amount of the frauds is $3,355,026.20. Four of the victims were aged between 35-45, two were aged 59 or 60, but six were aged in their 70s or 80s…
Continue reading Fineff v The King
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Fineff v The King [2024] NSWCCA 102
- Case
- [2024] NSWCCA 102
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court were whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and whether the totality of the circumstances, including the appellant’s early plea of guilty and assistance to authorities, warranted a lesser sentence. The court considered the appellant’s subjective circumstances, which were highly favourable, against the objective gravity of the offending, which included the significant financial harm caused to the victims and the prolonged nature of the offending.
The court determined that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. It took into account the appellant's early guilty plea and cooperation with authorities, but emphasised the significant harm caused to the victims and the appellant’s prolonged offending period. The court also compared the sentence with those in comparable cases, finding that the sentence imposed was commensurate with the gravity of the offending. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the original sentence.
The final orders of the court were that the appeal against sentence was dismissed, and the original sentence of nine years imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and four months was upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.