R v Ahmad Kai ABOUCHAM [2008] NSWDC 385

R v Ahmad Kai ABOUCHAM [2008] NSWDC 385

A custodial sentence was inevitable because Mr Aboucham had a very bad criminal record for similar break and enter offences, was a persistent offender, and committed the offence while on parole and bail; however, the sentence was fixed at four years with a three-year non-parole period after taking into account his guilty plea, delay between identification and arrest, the relatively insignificant value of items stolen, and his drug addiction as relevant to planning and motivation, while treating conditional liberty as aggravating.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Break and Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence Contrary to S 112(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Mr Aboucham was convicted and sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years, and referred to the Drug Court.
Legal Topics
['break and Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'plea of Guilty' 'prior Convictions' 'personal Deterrence' 'offending While on Parole and Bail' 'drug Addiction' 'drug Court Referral' 'compulsory Drug Treatment Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break and Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'plea of Guilty' 'prior Convictions' 'personal Deterrence' 'offending While on Parole and Bail' 'drug Addiction' 'drug Court Referral' 'compulsory Drug Treatment Order']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence for Break and Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence Contrary to S 112(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 / Sentencing After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for break and enter and commit serious indictable offence where the offender pleaded guilty, had an extensive record for similar offending, and committed the offence while on parole and bail.' 'Whether the offender should be referred to the Drug Court to determine whether he should be the subject of a compulsory drug treatment order.']

Ratio Decidendi

A custodial sentence was inevitable because Mr Aboucham had a very bad criminal record for similar break and enter offences, was a persistent offender, and committed the offence while on parole and bail; however, the sentence was fixed at four years with a three-year non-parole period after taking into account his guilty plea, delay between identification and arrest, the relatively insignificant value of items stolen, and his drug addiction as relevant to planning and motivation, while treating conditional liberty as aggravating.

Court Disposition

Mr Aboucham was convicted and sentenced to four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years, and referred to the Drug Court.

Orders

  • ['Mr Aboucham is sentenced to four years imprisonment, to date from 12 November 2007 and to expire on 11 November 2011.' 'A non-parole period of three years is specified to commence on 12 November 2007 and to expire on 11 November 2010.' 'The earliest date on which he is eligible to be considered for release by the...