R v Vinson

[2002] QCA 379

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Vinson [2002] QCA 379

PARTIES:

R
v
VINSON, Damien John
(applicant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 180 of 2002
DC No 1593 of 2002

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

27 September 2002

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

5 September 2002

JUDGES:

Williams and Jerrard JJA and Atkinson J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made

ORDER:

Dismiss the application for leave to appeal

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – PLEA OF GUILTY, CONTRITION AND CO-OPERATION – ASSISTANCE TO AUTHORITIES AND CO-OPERATION – where applicant committed 27 separate dishonesty offences – where applicant volunteered to police the commission of 22 of these offences – where applicant submits that the fraud would have continued undetected had he not disclosed the offences to police – where applicant did not disclose all of the offences when originally questioned – where learned sentencing judge described the applicant as exhibiting some remorse – whether learned sentencing judge erred in not finding that the applicant’s co-operation evidenced the presence of overwhelming remorse

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS – REPARATION AND RESTITUTION BY OFFENDER – where applicant dishonestly applied his employer’s money for his own use – where applicant did not volunteer a willingness or a capacity for restitution until sentencing date –  whether this willingness should have been given more weight by learned sentencing judge

R v Bourke [1993] QCA 579; CA No 428 of 1993, 8 December 1993, considered
R v Cox [1995] QCA 563; CA No 367 of 1995, 15 December 1995, considered
R v Ferguson [1995] QCA 554; CA No 381 of 1995, 12 December 1995, considered
R v Sigley [2002] QCA 11; CA No 297 of 2001, 4 February 2002, considered

COUNSEL:

P J Davis for the applicant
P F Rutledge for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Ryan & Bosscher for the applicant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld) for the respondent

1. WILLIAMS JA: I have had the advantage of reading the reasons for judgment of Jerrard JA and there is nothing I wish to add thereto. The application for leave to appeal against sentence should be refused.

1. JERRARD JA: The applicant pleaded guilty on 31 May 2002 to an ex officio indictment charging him with having dishonestly applied for his own use money belonging to his employer between 10 October 2000 and 8 August 2001.  He acknowledged by his plea that he had dishonestly applied a total amount of $24,667.65 of his employer’s money to his own purposes.  He was sentenced to two years imprisonment, and the learned sentencing judge ordered that that sentence be suspended for two years after the applicant had served six months of that…