R v Boyle - [2023] NSWDC 57

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Boyle [2023] NSWDC 57
Hearing dates: 8 February 2023
Date of orders: 8 February 2023
Decision date: 08 February 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year 10 months with a non-parole period of 6 months.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Dishonestly obtain financial advantage by deception
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – fraud on State COVID payments- committed in custody - gaols sentences have not deterred this offender - accumulation - totality- institutionalised offender – parity
VICTIM COMPENSATION - order made

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
Gordon v R (1994) 71 A Crim R 459
MAK v R [2006] NSWCCA 381
Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26
R v Boyle [2022] NSWDC 4
R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301
Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14

Category: Sentence
Parties: Matthew John Boyle (the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the offender)
Solicitors:
Morrisons Law (for the offender)
Ms K McCrossin (for Director of Public Prosecutions)

File Number(s): 2022/00068825

sentence – ex tempore revised

Introduction

On 1 February 2022 I sentenced Matthew Boyle to a term of imprisonment of six years, six months with a non‑parole of four years and six months for a number of very serious offences: R v Boyle [2022] NSWDC 4. Boyle has a long criminal history and a sad and tragic personal history. It is a history of deprivation, drug use, crime, symptoms of mental illness and trauma. That background has had a significant impact on him and how he has lived his life in society. I recognised in that earlier sentence that his moral culpability would not be the same as a person who did not have such a background and sought to give full weight to it.
Boyle had been sentenced by Judge Conlon in September 2019. He was released to parole on 6 July 2020. He committed the offences that I dealt with on 1 February 2022, while he was on parole for those earlier offences. While he was in custody, he committed the two further offences that are for sentence today. They occurred before I sentenced him in February 2022. He was arrested on 7 December 2020. He has been in custody ever since.
Although the matters were originally listed before Nowra District Court both the prosecution and the defence agreed that it would be expedient and in the interests of justice that I resolve this matter. I acceded to an application to move this matter to Wollongong District Court.
The two matters for sentence today are offences of dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception: s 192E(1)(b) Crimes Act1900. That offence carries a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment.
I am also asked to take into account a Crimes (Sentencing…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Boyle

Details

AGLC: R v Boyle [2023] NSWDC 57
Case: [2023] NSWDC 57
Decision Date: 08 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Boyle, the defendant was convicted of obtaining a financial advantage by deception, specifically through fraudulent claims for COVID-19 financial support payments while in custody. The case was heard in the relevant Australian court, where the primary focus was on determining an appropriate sentence given the nature and circumstances of the offence. The defendant's criminal history and the impact of the offence on its victims were key considerations.

The court was tasked with addressing several legal issues, including the appropriate weight to give to the accumulation and totality of the defendant’s criminal conduct, the need for deterrence, and the relevance of the defendant's status as an institutionalised offender. Additionally, the court had to ensure that the sentence reflected the principles of parity, ensuring that similar offences are treated similarly, and to consider whether a victim compensation order was appropriate.

The court, in delivering its judgment, emphasised the seriousness of the offence, noting that the defendant had repeatedly engaged in dishonest conduct, even while in custody. It considered the defendant's extensive criminal history and the lack of deterrence from previous custodial sentences. The court also highlighted the impact on the victims and the need for a sentence that reflected the gravity of the offence. As a result, the court sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment of one year and ten months, with a non-parole period of six months. Furthermore, the court made an order for the defendant to pay compensation to the victims of the fraud.

The court's final orders included the aforementioned sentence and the victim compensation order, ensuring that the defendant's culpability was appropriately recognised and addressed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year 10 months with a non-parole period of 6 months.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Boyle [2023] NSWDC 57
Hearing dates:	8 February 2023
Date of orders:	8 February 2023
Decision date:	08 February 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Haesler SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year 10 months with a non-parole period of 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Dishonestly obtain financial advantage by deception SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – fraud on State COVID payments- committed in custody - gaols sentences have not deterred this offender - accumulation - totality- institutionalised offender – parity VICTIM COMPENSATION - order made
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Gordon v R (1994) 71 A Crim R 459 MAK v R [2006] NSWCCA 381 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Boyle [2022] NSWDC 4 R v Clinch (1994) 72 A Crim R 301 Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Matthew John Boyle (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:	Counsel: Mr S Fraser, Public Defender (for the offender) Solicitors: Morrisons Law (for the offender) Ms K McCrossin (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):	2022/00068825