CRIME – Dishonestly obtain financial advantage etc by deception
SENTENCING - Relevant factors on sentence – fraud by family bookkeeper - multiple frauds – multiple victims- rolled up offences – Form 1- payment received without the knowledge or authority - early plea some recompense- victim impact- remorse - assistance to facilitate police investigation – disclosure of unknown guilt- percentage reduction of sentence- prior good character – COVID restrictions in gaol - special circumstances
Shane Maree Hatton (the offender) Director of Public Prosecutions
Representation:
Counsel: Ms G Lewer (for the offender)
Solicitors: Morrisons Law (for the offender) Mr J Loosley (for Director of Public Prosecutions)
File Number(s):
2021/00091298
SENTENCE – EX TEMPORE REVISED
Shane Maree Hatton is for sentence today in relation to three serious offences, charged pursuant to s 192E(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900. Today she adhered to the guilty pleas entered in the Local Court. In relation to each of those matters she is convicted. When I sentence her for…
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 Hatton
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Hatton [2022] NSWDC 688
Case
[2022] NSWDC 688
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The appellant, Hatton, was charged with multiple counts of obtaining a financial advantage by deception. The charges stemmed from his actions as a family bookkeeper, where he dishonestly manipulated financial records to benefit himself at the expense of multiple victims. The case was heard and determined by the court of appeal in Australia. The primary legal issue before the court was the appropriate sentence to impose on Hatton, given the nature and extent of his criminal conduct. The court had to consider factors such as the number of offences, the number of victims, the financial loss caused, and Hatton's cooperation with authorities. The court's reasoning involved a careful assessment of these factors, along with the appellant's plea of guilty, some degree of recompense made to victims, and the impact on the victims. Additionally, the court took into account Hatton's remorse, his assistance in facilitating the police investigation, and his disclosure of unknown guilt. The court also considered the percentage reduction of sentence, Hatton's prior good character, and the special circumstances of COVID-19 restrictions in gaol. Ultimately, the court determined that an aggregate sentence of 5 years and 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years was appropriate. The court also ordered compensation orders pursuant to the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013.
Orders
Orders of the court
Aggregate sentence of 5 years 6 months with a non-parole period of 3 years. See [122]-[123]
Compensation orders pursuant to the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013. See [124]-[125]