Hayward v R (Cth) [2021] NSWCCA 63

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hayward v R (Cth) [2021] NSWCCA 63 Hearing dates: 2 December 2020 Date of orders: 9 April 2021 Decision date: 09 April 2021 Before: McCallum JA at [1]; Johnson J at [2]; R A Hulme J at [105]. Decision: 1. Extend time for the Applicant to seek leave to appeal against sentence to 3 September 2020.

2. Grant leave to appeal against sentence.

3. Allow the appeal and quash the sentences imposed at the Parramatta District Court on 20 June 2016 and corrected on 24 June 2016.

4. In their place, sentence the Applicant to an aggregate term of imprisonment of nine years and six months comprising a non-parole period of six years and four months commencing on 8 January 2015 and expiring on 7 May 2021 with a balance of term of three years and two months commencing on 8 May 2021 and expiring on 7 July 2024.

5. The earliest date upon which the Applicant will be eligible for release on parole is 8 May 2021. Catchwords: APPEAL – sentence – applicant convicted of offences of possessing and uttering counterfeit money and producing false documents – applicant sentenced prior to decision in Xiao v R – regard not had to utilitarian value of Applicant's pleas of guilty – Xiao v R error demonstrated – consideration of factors relevant to sentence for counterfeiting and identity fraud offences – general and specific deterrence significant factors on sentence – applicant resentenced Legislation Cited: Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) Crimes (Currency) Act 1981 (Cth) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Cases Cited: Bae v R [2020] NSWCCA 35 Betka v R [2020] NSWCCA 197 Betts v The Queen (2016) 258 CLR 4520; [2016] HCA 25 Cameron v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 339; [2002] HCA 6 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Beattie (2017) 270 A Crim R 556; [2017] NSWCCA 301 DL v The Queen (2018) 265 CLR 215; [2018] HCA 32 Huang v R (2018) 332 FLR 158; [2018] NSWCCA 70 Johnston v R [2017] NSWCCA 53 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Khalid v R (2020) 102 NSWLR 160; [2020] NSWCCA 73 Parente v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284 R v Gittani [2002] NSWCCA 139 R v Institoris (2002) 129 A Crim R 458; [2002] NSWCCA 8 R v Rohde (1985) 17 A Crim R 166 R v Thomson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 Sabbah v R (Cth) (2020) 283 A Crim R 78; [2020] NSWCCA 89 Stevens v R [2009] NSWCCA 260 Tyler v R; Chalmers v R (2007) 173 A Crim R 458; [2007] NSWCCA 247 Van Haltren v R (2008) 191 A Crim R 53; [2008] NSWCCA 274 Weber v R [2020] NSWCCA 103 Xiao v R (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4 Texts Cited: --- Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ralf Hayward (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Ms M Avenell SC (Applicant) Mr Y Shariff SC (Respondent)