Regina v Heslehurst [1999] NSWCCA 183

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal CITATION : Regina v Heslehurst [1999] NSWCCA 183 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60187/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 30 June 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 30 June 1999

PARTIES : Regina v Maxwell John Heslehurst JUDGMENT OF : Grove J at 1; Abadee J at 15; Barr J at 16

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 98/21/1023; 97/21/0338 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER : Graham DCJ

COUNSEL : P.G. Ingram (Crown) No appearance of Appellant SOLICITORS : S.E. O'Connor In person CATCHWORDS : Criminal Law and Procedure - Sentence - Appellant Does Not Appear - No Substance Apparent In Written Submissions DECISION : Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60187/98

GROVE J ABADEE J BARR J

30 June 1999

REGINA v MAXWELL JOHN HESLEHURST

JUDGMENT

1 GROVE J: The appellant, Maxwell John Heslehurst, appeared before his Honour Judge Graham in the Parramatta District Court where he was sentenced in respect of three counts in an indictment alleging obtaining money by deception. 2 On that occasion, in respect of one of the counts in the indictment two form 1 documents containing a further forty charges of obtaining money by deception and one charge of failing to appear were taken into account. 3 The result of the appellant's appearance was that his Honour imposed an effective sentence of three years imprisonment, comprising minimum and additional terms of eighteen months each respectively. The minimum term was ordered to commence on 18 November 1997 and expire on 17 May 1999. The applicant was ordered to be released at the expiry of the minimum term. That time has passed and we were informed that the appellant is at large. 4 The appellant has been notified of the listing today. It might be recorded that this appeal was previously listed before the Court on 3 March 1999, whilst the appellant was in custody. He did not appear on that occasion as information was received from the prison that he had been admitted to hospital and was incapable of travelling to court. By coincidence I was a member of the court constituted on that occasion. 5 The appellant has been called three times today, once at 10 a.m., again at 11 a.m. and finally at 12.15 p.m. He has not appeared on any occasion. 6 The appellant, in response to the directions of the Registrar, has supplied written submissions. It does not appear that the appellant had legal representation and it was anticipated that he would appear for himself in this appeal. 7 In those circumstances the appeal may proceed upon the written submissions which have been received. It is unnecessary to detail all of the offences. One example will suffice. It was the modus operandi of the appellant to approach people with an assertion that in his employment as a debt collector he had available repossessed motor vehicles which he was prepared to sell for the amount alleged to be outstanding pursuant to hire purchase agreement. There were in fact no such vehicles, but on many occasions he obtained money from would-be purchasers. 8 The appellant pleaded guilty before the District Court. It is perhaps sufficient to indicate the posture then adopted to recite the content of brief cross-examination by the Crown Prosecutor when the appellant gave evidence in mitigation. That evidence was as follows: "Q. You have pleaded to three counts presently before the court? A. Yes. Q. And you were out on bail on that eventually? A. Yeah, I believe, yeah, I'm not sure which is which any more. Q. And you went out and systematically duped people? A. Yes. Q. To obtain further money? A. Yes.