CITATION: R v Matthew Paul PEISLEY [2010] NSWDC 240 HEARING DATE(S): 24 September 2010, 8 October 2010
JUDGMENT DATE:
8 October 2010JURISDICTION: Criminal JUDGMENT OF: Haesler DCJ SC DECISION: Count 2 - Proceeds of crime offence and Form 1. NPP 2 years 3 months with a balance of sentence of 1 year and 6 months.
Count 1 - Firearms Act offence. NPP 3 years and 9 months with a balance of sentence of 2 years 3 months.
The total effective sentence is 7 years with a NPP of 4 years 9 months.CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL - Firearms offences - Proceeds of crime - Operation Schoale LEGISLATION CITED: Firearms Act 1996
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999CASES CITED: R v Cromarty (2004) 144 A Crim R 515
Mack v R [2009] NSWCCA 216
Basedow v R [2010] NSWCCA 76
R v Mahmud [2010] NSWCCA 219PARTIES: Regina
Matthew Paul PeisleyFILE NUMBER(S): 2008/00258322 COUNSEL: Mr W Hunt (Offender) SOLICITORS: Ms F Gray (Director of Public Prosecutions)
Mr W O'Brien (Offender)
SENTENCE
Introduction
1. On Wednesday 28 February 2007 police attended the home of Matthew Paul Peisley, the offender, in Tarrawanna, a suburb of Wollongong. They had with them a valid search warrant. Over the next few hours police searched the premises and found a significant number of firearms, including three prohibited firearms, being a 12 gauge Remington self-loading shotgun, a 9 mm Parabellum Steyr self-loading pistol and a .22 Stirling model self-loading rifle with silencer attached. Also found was a prohibited pistol, being a .44 Magnum Desert Eagle self-loading pistol with distinctive gold plating.
2. Other firearms and weapons found included magazines, one of which was loaded, for the Steyr pistol; an electric Taser-type anti-personnel device; a .357 Magnum Smith and Wesson six chamber revolver; a .22 Winchester Magnum rimfire; Magnum Mossberg repeating rifle; a .22 calibre Winchester model 600 repeating rifle; a 12 gauge single barrel shotgun of Russian manufacture; and a 12 gauge Amadeo Rossi double barrel shotgun.
3. A large quantity of ammunition was also found. All the firearms were stored away and were not readily accessible. An example is shown in the extract of the video of the search of the premises tendered after the hearing of the matter as Exhibit D. It indicates that although the 9 mm self-loading pistol was located in a bag with magazines, one of which contained four rounds of ammunition, it was also stored behind a cabinet under a television, which had to be moved to get to it.
4. Located in the roof cavity was a quantity of cash. That cash was packed into thirty-nine heat-sealed bags, six of which bore the offender’s fingerprints. No other fingerprints were located on the bags. The cash in the roof cavity totalled $10,209,060. Also found were money counters and a plastic heat-sealed packaging system.
5. An unrelated charge of obtain benefit by deception, involving the offender providing a false letter in an application for mortgage finance, was also before the…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Matthew Paul Peisley and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2010] NSWDC 240
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether the prosecution had sufficiently proven the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the firearms offence and the proceeds of crime offence. Additionally, the court needed to consider the appropriate sentence, including any non-parole period (NPP), taking into account the totality of the defendant's criminal conduct and the principles of justice.
The court found Peisley guilty on both counts. In reaching its decision, the court meticulously examined the evidence provided, including witness testimonies, forensic analysis, and other material presented during the trial. The court concluded that the prosecution had established the necessary elements for both offences. In determining the sentence, the court considered the severity and impact of the crimes, the defendant's criminal history, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation. Ultimately, the court imposed a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months for the proceeds of crime offence and 3 years and 9 months for the firearms offence. The total effective sentence was set at 7 years, with the non-parole period amounting to 4 years and 9 months.
The court's final orders reflected the comprehensive sentencing approach, ensuring that the sentence aligned with the principles of justice, deterrence, and the protection of the community.
Orders
Orders of the court
Count 2 - Proceeds of crime offence and Form 1. NPP 2 years 3 months with a balance of sentence of 1 year and 6 months.
Count 1 - Firearms Act offence. NPP 3 years and 9 months with a balance of sentence of 2 years 3 months.
The total effective sentence is 7 years with a NPP of 4 years 9 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.