Legal Research
Cases
R v Wasson

R v Wasson

Case [2004] NSWCCA 200 3 August 2004

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: R v . WASSON [2004] NSWCCA 200

HEARING DATE(S): 16/06/2004

JUDGMENT DATE:
3 August 2004

JUDGMENT OF: Bryson JA at 1; James J at 23; Kirby J at 24

DECISION: Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal against sentence - conspiracy to defraud (false report that vehicle stolen with intention of false insurance claim) - applicant took leading part in conspiracy - applicant F aged 37 with several prior convictions including one for dishonesty - District Court sentence 2 yrs, NP 1-1/2 years. Consideration of - early plea of guilty - special circumstances - procedural fairness - whether sentence excessive. Leave granted, appeal dismissed.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900, s.178BA
Justices Act 1900, s.51A
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Standard Minimum Sentencing) Act 2002
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 subs.6(3).

CASES CITED: R. v. Lewis [2003] NSWCCA 375
R. v. Thomson (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
R v. Mason [2000] NSWCCA 207
Pantorno v. R (1989) 166 CLR 466
Champion v. R (1992) 64 A Crim R 244
Parker v. DPP (1992) 28 NSWLR 282

PARTIES :
Regina v Tracey Lee Wasson

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 60075 of 2004

COUNSEL: D. Frearson - Crown
H. Cox - Applicant

SOLICITORS: Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Mr Couch) - Crown
Legal Aid Commission (Mr Bryan Dowe) - Applicant

LOWER COURTJURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 03/31/0195

LOWER COURT
JUDICIAL OFFICER : English DCJ (Taree)

60075 of 2004

BRYSON JA
JAMES J
KIRBY J
3 August 2004

REGINA v TRACEY LEE WASSON

Judgment

1 BRYSON JA: The applicant seeks leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon her by her Honour Judge English in the District Court at Taree on Friday 29 August 2003. The offence charged was conspiracy under the Common Law: conspiring with Brendan William Fensom and Bradley Scott Lewis on 20 November 2002 to dishonestly obtain the benefit of $20,800 for Bradley Scott Lewis by deception, by falsely reporting to the police that a motor vehicle owned by Lewis was stolen, with the intention of destroying the motor vehicle and dishonestly making a claim for compensation on the insurer. Conspiracy is an offence for which no maximum term of imprisonment is prescribed by law. The substantive offence to which the conspiracy related is the offence of “obtaining money etc by deception” under s.178BA of the Crimes Act 1900, the maximum penalty for which is five years’ imprisonment.

2 Pursuant to the conspiracy the applicant and Fensom removed the vehicle from a car park and Lewis falsely reported that it had been stolen. The offence was discovered by chance less than an hour later when police stopped the vehicle for a random breath test. The applicant made substantial admissions in an electronically recorded interview within the next few hours. An Information was laid on 1 April 2003, the applicant was arrested on 1 May 2003 on warrant and she then obtained bail. She indicated that she would plead guilty on the first occasion she was brought before Taree Local Court.…

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 Wasson

Details

AGLC: R v Wasson [2004] NSWCCA 200
Case: [2004] NSWCCA 200
Decision Date: 3 August 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Wasson, the applicant was found guilty of conspiracy to defraud by falsely reporting a vehicle stolen with the intention of making a false insurance claim. The applicant, Wasson, took a leading role in the conspiracy. Wasson, aged 37 at the time, had several prior convictions, including one for dishonesty. The District Court sentenced Wasson to two years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of one and a half years. Wasson appealed against the sentence, seeking to have it reduced on the basis that it was excessive.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was excessive in the circumstances of the case. The court considered various factors in reaching its decision, including the applicant's early plea of guilty, the applicant's age and prior convictions, and the special circumstances of the case. The court also had to consider whether the applicant's right to procedural fairness had been breached in any way during the sentencing process. Ultimately, the court had to determine whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was appropriate and whether it should be varied.

In dismissing the appeal, the court found that the sentence imposed by the District Court was not excessive. The court noted that Wasson had taken a leading role in the conspiracy and had several prior convictions, including one for dishonesty. The court also found that Wasson's early plea of guilty was a mitigating factor, but it was not sufficient to warrant a significant reduction in sentence. The court held that the sentence imposed by the District Court was appropriate and did not breach the applicant's right to procedural fairness. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

No orders were made by the court in relation to the appeal. The sentence imposed by the District Court remained in place.

Orders