Keefe v The Queen

The applicants in this matter were convicted of conspiring to dishonestly cause a risk of loss to a Commonwealth entity, Australia Post, on two separate occasions. They were acquitted of two further charges. They sought leave to appeal against both their convictions and sentences. The appeal related to two key issues. The first was whether the applicants’ conviction on one charge was inconsistent with their acquittal on another charge. The second was whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive and disproportionate to that imposed on their co-conspirator.

The court found that the verdicts could be reconciled as they were based on different facts. The court held that the differing verdicts did not present an affront to logic or common sense. Regarding the sentences, the court found that neither the total effective sentence nor the non-parole period was manifestly excessive. The court also held that the sentences were not disproportionate to that imposed on the co-conspirator. Accordingly, the applicants’ applications for leave to appeal were refused.

No further orders were made by the court. The applicants’ convictions and sentences were upheld.