R v Nazih ZANTOUT [2009] NSWDC 415

R v Nazih ZANTOUT [2009] NSWDC 415

Because the robbery in company was a very serious, planned offence in which the victim was lured to an isolated car park, threatened with a knife and robbed of $11,500, a full-time custodial sentence was inevitable. A five-year head sentence was appropriate by reference to the guideline judgment, but the earliest guilty plea, developmental delay, vulnerability, lack of prior convictions, unlikelihood of re-offending and reduced importance of general deterrence justified reducing the overall sentence to three years. Special circumstances, including first significant custody and reintegration needs, justified an eighteen-month non-parole period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Robbery in Company / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Nazih Zantout was sentenced to three years imprisonment with a non-parole period of eighteen months and a balance of term of eighteen months.
Legal Topics
['robbery in Company' 'guideline Judgment' 'plea of Guilty' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances' 'developmental Delay' 'victim Vulnerability' 'parole Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery in Company' 'guideline Judgment' 'plea of Guilty' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances' 'developmental Delay' 'victim Vulnerability' 'parole Conditions']

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 for Robbery in Company / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for robbery in company under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 where a co-offender used a knife and the victim was lured to an underground car park.' 'How the guideline judgment in R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 should inform the head sentence.' "What weight should be given to the offender's early guilty plea, lack of prior convictions, developmental delay, Marfan Syndrome, family support and unlikelihood of re-offending." 'Whether special circumstances justified a non-parole period below the usual ratio.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the robbery in company was a very serious, planned offence in which the victim was lured to an isolated car park, threatened with a knife and robbed of $11,500, a full-time custodial sentence was inevitable. A five-year head sentence was appropriate by reference to the guideline judgment, but the earliest guilty plea, developmental delay, vulnerability, lack of prior convictions, unlikelihood of re-offending and reduced importance of general deterrence justified reducing the overall sentence to three years. Special circumstances, including first significant custody and reintegration needs, justified an eighteen-month non-parole period.

Court Disposition

Nazih Zantout was sentenced to three years imprisonment with a non-parole period of eighteen months and a balance of term of eighteen months.

Orders

  • ['Non-parole period of eighteen months commencing 30 October 2009 and expiring on 29 April 2011.' 'Balance of term of eighteen months commencing on 30 April 2011 and concluding on 29 October 2012.' 'Overall sentence of three years commencing 30 October 2009 and expiring on 29 October 2012.' 'Under s 50 of the Crimes...