R v REFAI [2001] NSWCCA 190

R v REFAI [2001] NSWCCA 190

The sentence of eighteen months with a non-parole period of nine months was not shown to involve appellable error. Although delay was great and rehabilitation significant, the applicant had deliberately participated over months in a significant commercial cocaine selling operation. Any disparity with co-offender sentences was not marked, and in any event the applicant's sentence was already exceedingly lenient and could not properly have been lower. Full time custody was required for deterrence and punishment, and the circumstances did not justify home detention or a reduced sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['knowingly Taking Part in the Supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'cocaine Supply' 'parity in Sentencing' 'delay' 'youth' 'rehabilitation' 'home Detention' 'general Deterrence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['knowingly Taking Part in the Supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'cocaine Supply' 'parity in Sentencing' 'delay' 'youth' 'rehabilitation' 'home Detention' 'general Deterrence']

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 Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in the application of the principle of parity.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to delay, youth and demonstrated rehabilitation.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient consideration to home detention.' "Whether the applicant's sentence should be reduced in light of sentences imposed on co-offenders."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of eighteen months with a non-parole period of nine months was not shown to involve appellable error. Although delay was great and rehabilitation significant, the applicant had deliberately participated over months in a significant commercial cocaine selling operation. Any disparity with co-offender sentences was not marked, and in any event the applicant's sentence was already exceedingly lenient and could not properly have been lower. Full time custody was required for deterrence and punishment, and the circumstances did not justify home detention or a reduced sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']