R v Webber

[2000] QCA 316

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Webber  [2000] QCA 316

PARTIES:

R
v
WEBBER, Paul Francis
(applicant/appellant)

FILE NO:

CA No 436 of 1999
DC No 2512 of 1999

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Sentence application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

8 August 2000

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

2 June 2000

JUDGES:

McMurdo P, Pincus JA and Chesterman J
Joint reasons for judgment of McMurdo P and Chesterman J;  separate reasons of Pincus JA dissenting as to the orders made

ORDER:

Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted;  appeal allowed in respect of the first two counts and sentence reduced on each of those counts to seven years with a recommendation of consideration for parole after having served three years.

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 – applicant gave substantial co-operation in providing information and evidence against other offenders – balance between need for discernible and worthwhile discount for co‑operation and need for sentence to reflect seriousness of offence – sentencing judge did not state what sentence would have been imposed but for the co-operation, pursuant to s 13A(7) Penalties and Sentences Act 1992 – re-exercise of sentencing discretion

Penalties and Sentences Act 1992, s 13A

Bailey [1999] QCA 40; CA No 15 of 1999, 24 February 1999, considered

Chapple  CA No 461 of 1994, 31 March 1995, considered
Corrigan [1994] 2 Qd R 415, considered

Gadaloff [1999] QCA 286; CA No 24 of 1999, 24 September 1999, considered

Green  CA No 426 of 1995, 30 January 1996, considered

McQuire & Porter (No 2) [2000] QCA 40; CA Nos 280 and 308 of 1999, 25 February 2000, considered

Taylor  CA No 406 of 1994, 23 November 1994, considered

COUNSEL:

A J Glynn SC for the applicant/appellant

L J Clare for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Robertson O'Gorman for the applicant/appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. McMURDO P and CHESTERMAN J:  The facts relevant to this appeal appear in the judgment of Pincus JA.  We respectfully adopt his Honour’s recitation of the facts and analysis of the comparable cases.  We would mention, in addition, R  v Gadaloff [1999] QCA 286, CA No 24 of 1999, 24 September 1999 in which the appellant, an employee of a local authority stole, over a period of about three years, a little in excess of $2,500.000. Gadaloff pleaded guilty and promised to assist in the recovery of the stolen money. He was sentenced to eight years imprisonment without any recommendation for early parole. His application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused.

1. What differentiates this case from those others is the fact that the applicant instructed Tallon in the method he utilised to commit systematic frauds against his employer and then recruited Tallon to commit similar frauds against FAI in return for…