R v Hawat [2023] NSWDC 632

R v Hawat [2023] NSWDC 632

The ongoing drug supply offending warranted full-time imprisonment because of its repetition, quantities and value, and the offender's criminal history precluded leniency. However, the offending was objectively in the midrange rather than the high range because the method was unsophisticated, involved limited organisation, and was readily detectable. The offender's guilty pleas warranted a 25% discount, and special circumstances were found because drug rehabilitation and supervision on release required a longer parole period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of five years with a non-parole period of three years. Convictions were recorded for the sequence 6 and sequence 9 offences under s 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 with no other penalty.
Legal Topics
['supplying Prohibited Drugs on an Ongoing Basis' 'proceeds of Crime' 'possession of Prohibited Drug' 'form 1 Offences' 'special Circumstances' 'drug Rehabilitation' 'third Party Hardship']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['supplying Prohibited Drugs on an Ongoing Basis' 'proceeds of Crime' 'possession of Prohibited Drug' 'form 1 Offences' 'special Circumstances' 'drug Rehabilitation' 'third Party Hardship']

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 Following Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the offender should receive a full-time custodial sentence for supplying prohibited drugs on an ongoing basis.' 'Whether the offending was towards the high end of objective seriousness or within the midrange.' "What weight should be given to the offender's personal circumstances, criminal history, guilty pleas and prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the statutory relationship between the head sentence and non-parole period.' "Whether hardship to the offender's wife and children amounted to special circumstances."]

Ratio Decidendi

The ongoing drug supply offending warranted full-time imprisonment because of its repetition, quantities and value, and the offender's criminal history precluded leniency. However, the offending was objectively in the midrange rather than the high range because the method was unsophisticated, involved limited organisation, and was readily detectable. The offender's guilty pleas warranted a 25% discount, and special circumstances were found because drug rehabilitation and supervision on release required a longer parole period.

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of five years with a non-parole period of three years. Convictions were recorded for the sequence 6 and sequence 9 offences under s 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 with no other penalty.

Orders

  • ['For the offences to which Ibrahim Hawat pleaded guilty, he is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment.' 'A non-parole period of three years is set commencing on 27 March 2022 and expiring on 26 March 2025.' 'A further period of imprisonment of two years is imposed commencing on expiry of the non-parole period and...