R v Rees

[2002] QCA 469

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Rees [2002] QCA 469

PARTIES:

R
v
REES, Josephine Mary
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA 205 of 2002
DC No 20 of 2001

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Townsville

DELIVERED ON:

4 November 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

4 November 2002

JUDGES:

McPherson and Jerrard JJA, Mullins J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the court, each concurring as to the orders made

ORDERS:

1.   Application granted.

2.   Appeal allowed.

3.   Orders are varied to the extent of imposing a sentence of 3 years imprisonment suspended after 9 months imprisonment with an operational period of 3 years.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT –
SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT – MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – comparable sentences consistently lower – whether in all circumstances sentence manifestly excessive

COUNSEL:

D Shepherd for the applicant
T A Fuller for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

McPHERSON JA:  The applicant was sentenced in the District Court at Townsville on her plea of guilty to an indictment charging one count of fraud under section 408C of the Code, together with circumstances of aggravation that she was an employee and that the amount was in excess of $5,000. 

The sentence imposed was imprisonment for three and a half years suspended after 15 months for an operational period of three and a half years.  A conviction was recorded and the applicant was ordered by 12.30 p.m. that day to pay a sum of $23,852.09 by way of restitution, which was the balance amount outstanding out of a total of $51,063.87 which had been taken by the applicant.  That restitution amount was, I understand, paid in accordance with the terms of the order.

In 1993 the complainant husband and wife purchased a real estate business in which the applicant was working as a salesperson.  In 1995 she took on the role of property manager, which entailed looking after the firm's listed rental properties comprising some 200 or more lessors.

Her functions included the collection of bond money from the Residential Tenancy Authority and paying those sums to the outgoing tenants or landlords according to their respective entitlements.  Between November 1995 and January 1999 she embezzled sums totalling the amount of $51,063.887 referred to. 

Sometimes she replaced the money, sometimes she did not, which evidently explains why only some $23,000 was in the end ordered to be repaid.  The offending behaviour was discovered when the complainants commissioned an audit and the applicant's employment was terminated in March 1999. 

The applicant was interviewed by police in December 1999.  She made admissions concerning some of the matters, but she ceased to do so when her then solicitors advised her not to answer further questions.  The committal proceedings took the form of a full hand-up, although it appears that some witnesses were nevertheless obliged to attend Court.

A trial was listed on…