Kibukamusoke, John v The Queen

[1998] FCA 859

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA)

)AG 10 of 1998

CANBERRA DISTRICT REGISTRY)

)

GENERAL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:JOHN KIBUKAMUSOKE

Appellant

AND:THE QUEEN

Respondent

JUDGES:HIGGINS, HEEREY AND COOPER JJ

PLACE:CANBERRA

DATE:6 JULY 1998

MINUTES OF ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The appeal be dismissed.

Note:Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA)

)AG 10 of 1998

CANBERRA DISTRICT REGISTRY)

)

GENERAL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:JOHN KIBUKAMUSOKE

Appellant

AND:THE QUEEN

Respondent

JUDGES:HIGGINS, HEEREY AND COOPER JJ

PLACE:CANBERRA

DATE:6 JULY 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

HIGGINS J:

1.This is an appeal against a sentence or, strictly speaking, sentences, imposed by Gallop J in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.Without rehearsing each and every one of the sentences imposed, the sentences aggregated eight years as a head sentence and a non-parole period of four years was fixed.Those sentences date from December of last year.The attack on the sentences imposed did not reveal any error of principle which his Honour had made in arriving at those sentences nor does it seem to me that on examining the authorities and after listening to the submissions of counsel that the sentences imposed are so far out of the norm as to themselves bespeak error. 2.In particular, whilst there were, of course, compelling personal circumstances which the appellant could call in aid there was, as his Honour noted, a lack of contrition, there was a lack of explanation as to where the moneys which had been defrauded from the tax payer had gone, a lack of significant reparation.In cases where there has been a lower non-parole period imposed it does appear that the personal circumstances of those offenders was regarded as appropriately relevant to do that. Just to take the case of McDonald, for example, there was significant remorse, there were other sentences which had been imposed which formed part of the same general pattern of behaviour and even there the sentence was not greatly distinguishable from the present.I would dismiss the appeal.

I certify that this and the preceding page are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Higgins.

Associate:

Date:1998

Counsel for the Appellant:A. Doig

Solicitors for the Appellant:Deacons Graham James

Counsel for the Respondent:G. Lalor

Solicitors for the Respondent:Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

Date of hearing:6 July 1998

Date of judgment:6 July 1998

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA)

)AG 10 of 1998

CANBERRA DISTRICT REGISTRY)

)

GENERAL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:JOHN KIBUKAMUSOKE

Appellant

AND:THE QUEEN

Respondent

JUDGES:HIGGINS, HEEREY AND COOPER JJ

PLACE:CANBERRA

DATE:6 JULY 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

HEEREY J:

1.I agree.The offences were indeed extremely serious involving, as they did, fraud of almost $1 million over a period of four years.It could not be suggested that in such circumstances a head sentence of eight years would be outside the range.That being so I cannot see how a non-parole period of half that amount could be said to be manifestly excessive.

I certify that this page is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Heerey.

Associate:

Date:1998

Counsel for the Appellant:A. Doig

Solicitors for the Appellant:Deacons Graham James

Counsel for the Respondent:G. Lalor

Solicitors for the Respondent:Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

Date of hearing:6 July 1998

Date of judgment:6 July 1998

GENERAL DISTRIBUTION

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA)

)AG 10 of 1998

CANBERRA DISTRICT REGISTRY)

)

GENERAL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

BETWEEN:JOHN KIBUKAMUSOKE

Appellant

AND:THE QUEEN

Respondent

JUDGES:HIGGINS, HEEREY AND COOPER JJ

PLACE:CANBERRA

DATE:6 JULY 1998

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

COOPER J:

1.I agree.

I certify that this page is a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Justice Cooper.

Associate:

Date:1998