R v Jensen; ex parte Attorney-General of Queensland

[1998] QCA 275

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Misappropriation
3. › Conviction appeal
4. › Inconsistent verdicts
5. › Whether acquittal on one count inconsistent with conviction on other counts
6. › Whether rational basis for jury to discriminate between counts
7. › Criminal Code (Qld), s 408C
1. Criminal Law
2. › Trial procedure
3. › Cross-examination of accused
4. › Whether trial judge erred in allowing further cross-examination after re-examination
5. › Discretion to permit resumption of cross-examination
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Attorney-General's appeal against sentence
4. › Misappropriation of over $200,000
5. › Breach of trust
6. › Elderly victims
7. › Whether wholly suspended sentence completely out of line with established authority
8. › Deterrence
9. › Restitution from family member

Quick Take

A wholly suspended sentence for misappropriation of over $200,000 from elderly persons in a position of trust is completely out of line with established sentencing authority. Restitution funded by a family member of the offender, rather than the offender personally, is entitled to limited weight in mitigation. Those minded to prey on the aged to relieve them of their funds need to be strongly deterred.

Case Details

Citation[1998] QCA 275

CourtQCA

JurisdictionQueensland

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.

3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.

Cited by4

2023R v SublooQCA 101
2014R v OgdenQCA 89
2013R v McMahonQCA 240
2004R v GregoryQCA 87

Relies on

Mackenzie v RHCA 35

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in