R v Haouli [2024] NSWDC 370

R v Haouli [2024] NSWDC 370

The court found the objective seriousness of the offences to be towards the lower end, taking into account the amateurish execution, lack of violence, restitution of stolen property, and the offender's moral culpability reduced due to significant drug addiction and disadvantaged background. The offender's substantial rehabilitation, contrition, early guilty pleas, and low risk of reoffending justified an aggregate sentence of two years' imprisonment, to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order. The time already spent in custody, ongoing rehabilitation, and community safety considerations made community-based sentencing appropriate.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex (Crown); Offender: Marcel Haouli
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentence
Outcome
Aggregate term of two years' imprisonment to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order with specific conditions; conviction on sequence 9 with no further penalty.
Legal Topics
Property Offences, Enter Dwelling With Intent, Dishonestly Obtain Property, Attempted Theft of Motor Vehicle, Dispose of Stolen Property, Sentencing, Objective Seriousness, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors, Co Offenders, Parity, Moral Culpability, Intensive Corrections Order
Criminal Law Property Offences Enter Dwelling With Intent Dishonestly Obtain Property Attempted Theft of Motor Vehicle Dispose of Stolen Property Sentencing Objective Seriousness +5 more

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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex (Crown)

Prosecution

Marcel Haouli

Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for property and dishonesty offences involving theft, attempted theft, disposal of stolen property, and associated entries with aggravating and mitigating circumstances?
  2. 2 How should the objective seriousness, moral culpability, criminal record, prospects of rehabilitation, and parity with a co-offender be assessed?
  3. 3 Should the sentence be served in custody or in the community via an Intensive Corrections Order?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the objective seriousness of the offences to be towards the lower end, taking into account the amateurish execution, lack of violence, restitution of stolen property, and the offender's moral culpability reduced due to significant drug addiction and disadvantaged background. The offender's substantial rehabilitation, contrition, early guilty pleas, and low risk of reoffending justified an aggregate sentence of two years' imprisonment, to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order. The time already spent in custody, ongoing rehabilitation, and community safety considerations made community-based sentencing appropriate.

Court Disposition

Aggregate term of two years' imprisonment to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order with specific conditions; conviction on sequence 9 with no further penalty.

Orders

  • The offender is convicted of the offences pleaded to, including matters on Form 1.
  • Aggregate sentence of two years' imprisonment for sequences 7 and 12, commencing 15 August 2024.