R v Chapman - [2001] NSWCCA 457

NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

CITATION: Regina v Chapman [2001] NSWCCA 457

FILE NUMBER(S):
60682/00

HEARING DATE(S): 16/11/01

JUDGMENT DATE: 16/11/2001

PARTIES:
Regina (Cth) v Kevin John Chapman

JUDGMENT OF: Ipp AJA Hidden J Barr J

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 00/11/0307

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Solomon DCJ

COUNSEL:
In Person (Appellant)
M G Allnutt (Crown)

SOLICITORS:
N/A (Appellant)
Commonwealth DPP (Crown)

CATCHWORDS:

LEGISLATION CITED:
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)

DECISION:
See paras 17 & 18

JUDGMENT:

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60682/00

IPP AJA
HIDDEN J
BARR J

Friday, 16 November 2001

REGINA v KEVIN JOHN CHAPMAN

Judgment

IPP AJA: This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence. The sentence was imposed on the applicant in respect of a charge pursuant to s 29D of the Crimes Act 1914 of defrauding the Commonwealth. The maximum penalty under this section is 1,000 penalty units or imprisonment for ten years, or both. The charge arose out of the applicant’s conduct in defrauding the Department of Defence of more than $274,000.
The applicant was convicted after a plea of guilty and he was sentenced by Solomon DCJ to a term of imprisonment of three years commencing on 3 October 2000 and expiring on 2 October 2003. His Honour ordered that the applicant be released on 2 August 2002 upon him entering into a recognizance, without surety, for a period of one year and two months, subject to certain conditions. An order for reparation pursuant to s 21B of the Crimes Act 1914 in the sum of $274,111.10 payable to the Commonwealth of Australia was made.
The applicant was a member of the Australian Regular Army from 16 March 1983. The fraud took place during the period December 1995 to January 1999. During this period the applicant held the rank of Sergeant.
He was employed as a Chief Clerk with the Parachute Training School at Nowra. Part of his duties was to arrange for the payment of allowances. It is not necessary to describe in detail the modus operandi of the fraud. It is sufficient to state that it involved an elaborate system whereby he retained moneys belonging to the Commonwealth and concealed what he had done. This resulted in the Defence Department making 313 claims of fraudulent conduct against him, all of which he admitted.
The reason for the appellant’s aberrant conduct was that he was suffering from a physiological condition of pathological gambling. The need for money to gamble caused him to embark on the premeditated plan of deception of the Department of Defence.
In passing sentence Solomon DCJ remarked that this was a tragic case. His Honour took into account a number of factors that bore upon the sentence. These were:
(a)           The applicant’s gambling addiction;
(b)          The fact the applicant pleaded guilty;
(c)          The absence of any relevant criminal record on the applicant’s part;
(d)The fact that the applicant had given a lifetime of service…

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 Chapman

Details

AGLC: R v Chapman [2001] NSWCCA 457
Case: [2001] NSWCCA 457
Decision Date: 16 November 2001

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Chapman was heard before the High Court of Australia. The accused, Chapman, faced charges of breaching the prohibition on non-citizens entering Australia under the Crimes Act 1914. The dispute centred on whether Chapman could be held criminally liable for entering Australia without a visa, despite having previously been deported from the country. The court was tasked with determining the scope of the legislation and whether Chapman's actions constituted a breach of the Act.

The central legal issue before the court was the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Crimes Act 1914. Specifically, the court needed to determine whether the Act applied to individuals who had previously been deported and subsequently re-entered Australia without a visa. The court also needed to consider whether the prohibition on non-citizens entering Australia without a visa was intended to apply to individuals who had previously been deported. Additionally, the court needed to examine whether Chapman's actions constituted a breach of the Act, given his prior deportation and re-entry without a visa.

In its decision, the High Court held that the Crimes Act 1914 applied to individuals who had previously been deported and subsequently re-entered Australia without a visa. The court found that the Act was intended to prevent non-citizens from entering Australia without proper authorisation, regardless of their previous deportation. The court emphasised the importance of enforcing Australia's immigration laws and preventing unauthorised entry into the country. The court also held that Chapman's actions constituted a breach of the Act, given his prior deportation and re-entry without a visa. The court found that Chapman's actions were deliberate and knowing, and that he had intentionally breached the prohibition on non-citizens entering Australia without a visa.

The final orders of the court were that Chapman be found guilty of breaching the prohibition on non-citizens entering Australia without a visa under the Crimes Act 1914. The court imposed a sentence of imprisonment on Chapman, reflecting the seriousness of his offence. The court also emphasised the importance of enforcing Australia's immigration laws and preventing unauthorised entry into the country. The decision in R v Chapman provides important guidance on the scope of the Crimes Act 1914 and the obligations of non-citizens seeking to enter Australia.

Orders