R v Biber [2018] NSWSC 535

R v Biber [2018] NSWSC 535

The offender knowingly and with some planning entered Syria intending to engage in armed hostilities, a serious offence requiring denunciation, general deterrence and punishment. However, his conduct was well below the mid-range for the offence because he was not charged with and did not actually engage in hostile activity, returned to Turkey of his own volition, was young, naive and immature, had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation, experienced unfair delay in being charged, and pleaded guilty. No sentence other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate, but a 20% discount for the utilitarian value of the plea and a non-parole period reflecting the mitigating circumstances were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period.
Legal Topics
['entering a Foreign State With Intent to Engage in Hostile Activity' 'foreign Incursions' 'armed Hostilities in Syria' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'youth and Immaturity' 'delay in Charging' 'specific Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['entering a Foreign State With Intent to Engage in Hostile Activity' 'foreign Incursions' 'armed Hostilities in Syria' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'youth and Immaturity' 'delay in Charging' 'specific Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'non Parole Period']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for entering Syria with the intention of engaging in armed hostilities contrary to s 6(1)(a) of the Crimes (Foreign Incursions and Recruitment) Act 1978 (Cth).' 'How the objective seriousness of the offence should be assessed where the offender entered Syria intending to engage in armed hostilities but did not actually engage in armed hostilities and returned to Turkey of his own volition.' "What weight should be given to the offender's guilty plea, youth, immaturity, family hardship, delay in charging, specific deterrence and prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether a sentence other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate and what non-parole period should be fixed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender knowingly and with some planning entered Syria intending to engage in armed hostilities, a serious offence requiring denunciation, general deterrence and punishment. However, his conduct was well below the mid-range for the offence because he was not charged with and did not actually engage in hostile activity, returned to Turkey of his own volition, was young, naive and immature, had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation, experienced unfair delay in being charged, and pleaded guilty. No sentence other than full-time imprisonment was appropriate, but a 20% discount for the utilitarian value of the plea and a non-parole period reflecting the mitigating circumstances were...

Court Disposition

Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period.

Orders

  • ['Mehmet Biber is convicted of the count on the indictment.' 'Mehmet Biber is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 4 years and 9 months commencing on 3 November 2016 and expiring on 2 August 2021.' 'A non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months is fixed, expiring on 2 May 2019.']