The offender was sentenced following pleas of guilty to 1 count dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception contrary to s 134.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, 1 count of attempting to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage by deception contrary to ss 11.1(1) and 134.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, and 2 counts of intending to dishonestly obtain a gain from a Commonwealth entity contrary to 135.1(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Additional dishonesty offences were taken into account under s 16BA. Offender also sentenced for a state dishonesty offence. Original sentenced imposed 4 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years. Offender appealed on the grounds that the sentencing judge excessively intervened in the course of the evidence of the applicant, and that the sentence was manifestly excessive.
Manifest Excess: The amount successfully obtained by the offender was $35,000. The sentences imposed in cases that bore any comparison with the sentence imposed in the present matter involved amounts far exceeding the amounts involved in the present matter, and frequently involved offending that was well planned and committed over a much longer period of time. For the amounts involved in the present case, the relatively short period of the offending, and the generally unsophisticated methods employed, borne out by the applicant’s failures to obtain the monies they attempted to obtain on so many occasions, the aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Further, the offence in count 4 involved an attempt to obtain an amount of $331.55. The sentencing judge indicated a sentence of ten months’ imprisonment. It is difficult to see how that was an appropriate sentence in all the circumstances. Had it been the only offence charged, it is difficult to see how any term of imprisonment could have been imposed.
Appeal to leave granted. Appeal upheld. Offender resentenced to 3 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months.
