Legal Research
Cases
R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison

R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison

Case [2011] QSC 187 24 June 2011

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison [2011] QSC 187

PARTIES:

R
v
STEPHEN BRIAN COX
(first defendant)
JOHN REGINALD CUFFE
(second defendant)
PETER JAMES MORRISON
(third defendant)

FILE NO:

BS 704 of 2009

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Sentencing

DELIVERED ON:

24 June 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

9 May 2011

JUDGE:

Fryberg J

ORDERS:

Stephen Brian Cox
1. Sentenced to imprisonment for nine years and 11 months to commence on 29 September 2011.
2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years and four months.
3. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure A to these reasons.

John Reginald Cuffe
1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years.
2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years.
3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence.
4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details.
5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons.

Peter James Morrison
1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years.
2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years.
3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence.
4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details.
5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons.

CATCHWORDS:

Criminal law – Particular offences – Property offences – Other frauds and impositions – Fraud – Defrauding the Commonwealth – Sentence

Criminal law – Sentence – Sentencing orders – Non parole period or minimum term – Queensland – Federal offenders

Criminal law – Sentence – Relevant factors – Totality – General principle

Corrective Services Act2006 (Qld) s 214, s 194

Crimes Act 1914 s 16, s 16A, s 16B, s 16F, s 19AA, s 19AB, s 19AL, s 19AM, s 19AN, s 19AQ, s 19AS s 19AU, s 19AV, s 19AZC, s 29D.

Director of Public Prosecutions v Hamman, unreported, Court of Appeal, NSW, Nos 60388 and 60457 of 1998, 1 December 1998, considered
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Gregory[2011] VSCA 145, cited
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson[2007] VSCA 176, considered
Leeth v The Commonwealth[1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered
Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered
Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited
R v Alateras[2004] VSCA 214, considered

R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited
R v Cox[2010] QCA 262, considered
R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QSC 188,…

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 Cox, Cuffe and Morrison

Details

AGLC: R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison [2011] QSC 187
Case: [2011] QSC 187
Decision Date: 24 June 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison, the Queensland Court of Appeal dealt with appeals against sentence and convictions for defrauding the Commonwealth. The three appellants were found guilty of participating in a scheme to defraud Centrelink, Australia's social services provider, of over $4 million. The court was required to determine the appropriate sentences for the appellants, taking into consideration the severity of their crimes and the principles of sentencing.

The primary legal issue before the court was the determination of appropriate sentences for the appellants, given the gravity of their crimes and the need to adhere to the principles of sentencing. This included assessing the appropriate non-parole periods for each appellant, as well as considering the time spent in pre-sentence custody. The court was also required to ensure that the sentences reflected the totality principle and general sentencing principles.

In delivering the judgement, the court emphasised the seriousness of the offences committed by the appellants. They noted that the fraud was not only large in scale but also involved deliberate deception of the Commonwealth. The court found that the primary judge had appropriately exercised his discretion in imposing the sentences, taking into account the relevant aggravating and mitigating factors. The court also held that the non-parole periods and the time spent in pre-sentence custody were appropriate and just. The appeal against sentence was dismissed, and the convictions were upheld.

The final orders of the court were that Stephen Brian Cox was sentenced to imprisonment for nine years and eleven months, with a non-parole period of three years and four months. John Reginald Cuffe and Peter James Morrison were each sentenced to imprisonment for six years, with a non-parole period of three years. The time spent in pre-sentence custody by Cuffe and Morrison was to be counted as time already served under their sentences. The court also directed that the relevant notices be handed to the appellants and that the Chief Executive of Corrective Services be advised of the pre-sentence custody details.

Orders

Orders of the court

Stephen Brian Cox

1. Sentenced to imprisonment for nine years and 11 months to commence on 29 September 2011.

2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years and four months.

3. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure A to these reasons.

John Reginald Cuffe

1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years.

2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years.

3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence.

4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details.

5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons.

Peter James Morrison

1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years.

2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years.

3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence.

4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details.

5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison [2011] QSC 187

Most Recent Citation

Dragojlovic v The Queen [2013] VSCA 151

Cases citing this decision · 2 of 2 shown

Dragojlovic v The Queen
[2013] VSCA 151 Para 1

…of Appeal, Phillips CJ, Tadgell and Ormiston JJA, 21 April 1998) 12–13. [154] R v Katsoulas [2008] VSCA 278 [10]–[14] (Redlich JA). [155] R v Cox [2011] QSC 187, [32] (Fryberg J); R v Cox [2013] QCA 10, [101] (Holmes JA).…
R v Huston; ex parte; R v Fox; ex parte; R v Henke; ex parte
[2011] QCA 350 Para 1

…subject of comment and analysis in several decisions. For convenience we set out the analysis undertaken by Fryberg J in R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison [2011] QSC 187 which contains thorough and helpful synopses. Ronen [2006] NSWCCA 123 “[60]The applicants were convicted after a lengthy trial of conspiracy to defra…

View all 2 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 31 of 31 shown

Pearce v R
[2014] NZCA 388

…sidered Leeth v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras [2004] VSCA 214, considered R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited R v Cox [2010] QCA 262, considered…
R v Schmidt
[2011] QCA 133 Para 1

…7 years of age when he must be released on parole, so his prospects of a useful life thereafter will not have been eliminated. [48] R v Schmidt [2011] QCA 133.…
DPP (Cth) v Gregory
[2011] VSCA 145

…f Appeal, NSW, Nos 60388 and 60457 of 1998, 1 December 1998, considered Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Gregory [2011] VSCA 145, cited Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson [2007] VSCA 176, considered Leeth v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2…
R v Hargraves & Stoten
[2010] QCA 328

…207, cited R v Cox [2010] QCA 262, considered R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QSC 188, applied R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QCA 328, considered R v Hart [2006] QCA 39 , considered R v Howson [2001] FCA 114, considered R v Hussein [2003] VSCA 187; (2003) 8 VR 92, considered R v Huston No 1488 of 2009, 30/03/201…
R v Cox
[2010] QCA 262 Para 1

…n for fixing that date at a point earlier than halfway through the sentence. The discrepancy was not noticed in the Court of Appeal.[40] [40] R v Cox [2010] QCA 262 [8].…
R v Hargraves and Stoten
[2010] QSC 188 Para 1

…re presently inapplicable. Subsequently, in respect of Cox, it will be necessary to have regard to the sentences which he is currently serving.[4] [2][2010] QSC 188 at [25] ff. The sentences which I imposed were reduced on appeal, but only because sentencing there proceeded on a different factual basis. [3] Crime…
R v Cramp
[2010] SASC 51 Para 1

…sentence. [45]Compare R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381 [18]; (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253 [112]; (2005) 155 A Crim R 252; R v Cramp [2010] SASC 51 [61]; (2010) 106 SASR 304, citing R v Bruce and Hollick [1998] SASC 6831; (1998) 71 SASR 536 at 541.…
Ridley v R
[2008] NSWCCA 324

…[2006] NSWCCA 123; (2006) 161 A Crim R 300, considered R v Shrestha [1991] HCA 26; (1991) 173 CLR 48, cited Ridley v R [2008] NSWCCA 324; (2008) 192 A Crim R 139, considered COUNSEL: G Long SC and J Hanna for the Crown D Shepherd for the 1 st defendant M Johnson for the 2 nd defendant A Nelson for the 3 rd defendan…
R v Phillips
[2008] QCA 284

…onsidered R v L [1995] QCA 444; [1996] 2 Qd R 63, cited R v Peterson [2008] QCA 70, considered R v Phillips & Woolgrove [2008] QCA 284; (2008) 188 A Crim R 133, considered R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 considered R v Ronen [2006] NSWCCA 123; (2006) 161 A Crim R 300, considered R v Shrestha [1991…
R v Peterson
[2008] QCA 70

…onsidered R v Huston No 1488 of 2009, 30/03/2011, considered R v L [1995] QCA 444; [1996] 2 Qd R 63, cited R v Peterson [2008] QCA 70, considered R v Phillips & Woolgrove [2008] QCA 284; (2008) 188 A Crim R 133, considered R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 considered R v Ronen [2006] NSWCCA 123; (2…
DPP (Cth) v Rowson
[2007] VSCA 176

…d Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Gregory [2011] VSCA 145, cited Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson [2007] VSCA 176, considered Leeth v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] H…
Cth Director of Public Prosecutions v Hart
[2007] QCA 184 Para 1

…ralian Tax Office (‘ATO’). [1]As to whom see R v Hart; ex parte Cth DPP [2006] QCA 39 and Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions v Hart [2007] QCA 184.…
R v MAK
[2006] NSWCCA 381 Para 1

…full time release date were I to impose a sentence of eight years imprisonment. [44]The half-way point in an eight year sentence. [45]Compare R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381 [18]; (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253 [112]; (2005) 155 A Crim R 252; R v Cramp [2010] SASC 51 [61]; (2010) 106 SASR 304, citin…
R v Ronen
[2006] NSWCCA 123

…2008] QCA 284; (2008) 188 A Crim R 133, considered R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 considered R v Ronen [2006] NSWCCA 123; (2006) 161 A Crim R 300, considered R v Shrestha [1991] HCA 26; (1991) 173 CLR 48, cited Ridley v R [2008] NSWCCA 324; (2008) 192 A Crim R 139, considered COUNSEL: G Long SC and…
R v Hart; ex parte
[2006] QCA 39 Para 1

…ly to deceive participants in the schemes but also to deceive the Australian Tax Office (‘ATO’). [1]As to whom see R v Hart; ex parte Cth DPP [2006] QCA 39 and Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions v Hart [2007] QCA 184.…
R v Knight
[2005] NSWCCA 253 Para 1

…years imprisonment. [44]The half-way point in an eight year sentence. [45]Compare R v MAK [2006] NSWCCA 381 [18]; (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253 [112]; (2005) 155 A Crim R 252; R v Cramp [2010] SASC 51 [61]; (2010) 106 SASR 304, citing R v Bruce and Hollick [1998] SASC 6831; (1998) 71 SASR 536…
Pearce v The Queen
[2005] WASCA 74

…07] VSCA 176, considered Leeth v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras [2004] VSCA 214, considered R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited R v Cox [2010]…
DPP (Cth) v Alateras
[2004] VSCA 214

…n [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras [2004] VSCA 214, considered R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited R v Cox [2010] QCA 262, considered R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QSC 188, applied R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QCA 328, consider…
R v KM
[2004] NSWCCA 65

…[46][2004] NSWCCA 65.…
R v Rivkin
[2004] NSWCCA 7 Para 1

…not as significant a mitigating factor as it is in relation to other offences.[8] [8]See the cases cited at [2010] QSC 188 [44] and also R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 at p 410.…
DPP (Cth) v Hussein
[2003] VSCA 187

…Stoten [2010] QCA 328, considered R v Hart [2006] QCA 39 , considered R v Howson [2001] FCA 114, considered R v Hussein [2003] VSCA 187; (2003) 8 VR 92, considered R v Huston No 1488 of 2009, 30/03/2011, considered R v L [1995] QCA 444; [1996] 2 Qd R 63, cited R v Peterson [2008] QCA 70, considered R v Phillips &…
R v Rivkin
[2003] NSWSC 447 Para 1

…t a mitigating factor as it is in relation to other offences.[8] [8]See the cases cited at [2010] QSC 188 [44] and also R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 at p 410.…
Cameron v the Queen
[2002] HCA 6 Para 1

…uments involved and the fact that a further 12 boxes of documents were disclosed by the prosecution on the eleventh day of the trial. [7] R v Cameron [2002] HCA 6; (2002) 209 CLR 339 .…
DPP (Cth) v Goldberg
[2001] VSCA 107

…[24][2001] VSCA 107 [54]; (2001) 184 ALR 387 at p 398.…
The Queen v Howson
[2001] FCA 114 Para 1

…of the witnesses were unable to remember things. Finally, there may have been other things arising from delay that he was not even aware of. [16][2001] FCA 114.…
Postiglione v the Queen
[1997] HCA 26 Para 1

…sentences appropriate for each offence is a just and appropriate measure of the total criminality involved.”[42] [42]McHugh J in Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295 at p 304.…
R v L; ex parte Attorney-General
[1995] QCA 444

…idered R v Hussein [2003] VSCA 187; (2003) 8 VR 92, considered R v Huston No 1488 of 2009, 30/03/2011, considered R v L [1995] QCA 444; [1996] 2 Qd R 63, cited R v Peterson [2008] QCA 70, considered R v Phillips & Woolgrove [2008] QCA 284; (2008) 188 A Crim R 133, considered R v Rivkin [2004] NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59…
Leeth v The Commonwealth
[1992] HCA 29

…11] VSCA 145, cited Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson [2007] VSCA 176, considered Leeth v The Commonwealth [1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras [2004…
R v Shrestha
[1991] HCA 26

…NSWCCA 7; (2004) 59 NSWLR 284 considered R v Ronen [2006] NSWCCA 123; (2006) 161 A Crim R 300, considered R v Shrestha [1991] HCA 26; (1991) 173 CLR 48, cited Ridley v R [2008] NSWCCA 324; (2008) 192 A Crim R 139, considered COUNSEL: G Long SC and J Hanna for the Crown D Shepherd for the 1 st defendant M Johnso…
SASR 304, citing R v Bruce and Hollick
[1998] SASC 6831 Para 1

…R 159; R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253 [112]; (2005) 155 A Crim R 252; R v Cramp [2010] SASC 51 [61]; (2010) 106 SASR 304, citing R v Bruce and Hollick [1998] SASC 6831; (1998) 71 SASR 536 at 541.…
R v Baunach
[1999] QCA 207

…onsidered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras [2004] VSCA 214, considered R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited R v Cox [2010] QCA 262, considered R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QSC 188, applied R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QCA 328, considered R v Hart [2006] QCA 39 , considered…

Legislation cited in this decision · 4

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
16, 16A(2)(a), 16F(1)(a), 19, 19AB(1), 1... 20 mentions (from Para 1)
Corrective Services Act 2006 (Qld)
214 2 mentions (from Para 1)
Financial Transaction Reports Act 1988 (Cth)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)

CITATION:	R v Cox, Cuffe and Morrison [2011] QSC 187
PARTIES:	R v STEPHEN BRIAN COX (first defendant) JOHN REGINALD CUFFE (second defendant) PETER JAMES MORRISON (third defendant)
FILE NO:	BS 704 of 2009
DIVISION:	Trial
PROCEEDING:	Sentencing
DELIVERED ON:	24 June 2011
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	9 May 2011
JUDGE:	Fryberg J
ORDERS:	Stephen Brian Cox 1. Sentenced to imprisonment for nine years and 11 months to commence on 29 September 2011. 2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years and four months. 3. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure A to these reasons. John Reginald Cuffe 1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years. 2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years. 3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence. 4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details. 5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons. Peter James Morrison 1. Sentenced to imprisonment for six years. 2. The non-parole period is fixed for of three years. 3. Time spent in pre-sentence custody from 6 May 2011 until 24 June 2011, a period of 49 days, will be time already served under the sentence. 4. The Sheriff to cause the Chief Executive (Corrective Services) to be advised in writing of the pre-sentence custody declaration and its details. 5. The court officer to hand him a notice in the form of Annexure B to these reasons.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal law – Particular offences – Property offences – Other frauds and impositions – Fraud – Defrauding the Commonwealth – Sentence Criminal law – Sentence – Sentencing orders – Non parole period or minimum term – Queensland – Federal offenders Criminal law – Sentence – Relevant factors – Totality – General principle Corrective Services Act2006 (Qld) s 214, s 194 Crimes Act 1914 s 16, s 16A, s 16B, s 16F, s 19AA, s 19AB, s 19AL, s 19AM, s 19AN, s 19AQ, s 19AS s 19AU, s 19AV, s 19AZC, s 29D. Director of Public Prosecutions v Hamman, unreported, Court of Appeal, NSW, Nos 60388 and 60457 of 1998, 1 December 1998, considered Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Gregory[2011] VSCA 145, cited Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Rowson[2007] VSCA 176, considered Leeth v The Commonwealth[1992] HCA 29 [21]; (1992) 174 CLR 455, considered Pearce v The Queen [2005] WASCA 74; (2005) 216 ALR 690, considered Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; (1997) 189 CLR 295, cited R v Alateras[2004] VSCA 214, considered R v Baunach [1999] QCA 207, cited R v Cox[2010] QCA 262, considered R v Hargraves and Stoten [2010] QSC 188,…