R v SHEIKHLARY [2010] NSWDC 117

R v SHEIKHLARY [2010] NSWDC 117

The offender's supply of methylamphetamine, with Form 1 matters involving cannabis and BZP, was objectively serious and not at the bottom of the range because he possessed multiple drug tablets and there was evidence consistent with drug supply. Although he pleaded guilty early, expressed remorse, had health and custody hardship issues, and was undertaking rehabilitation, his criminal history and commission of the offences while on a s 11 remand required personal deterrence and a sentence of full-time imprisonment. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period, resulting in a non-parole period of fourteen months and a head sentence of twenty-eight months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence for Supplying a Prohibited Drug / Sentencing After Early Guilty Plea
Outcome
Sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of fourteen months and a head sentence of twenty-eight months.
Legal Topics
['supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'methylamphetamine' 'benzylpiperazine (bzp)' 'form 1 Offences' 'non Parole Period' 'parole Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'methylamphetamine' 'benzylpiperazine (bzp)' 'form 1 Offences' 'non Parole Period' '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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence for Supplying a Prohibited Drug / Sentencing After Early Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for supplying methylamphetamine, taking into account Form 1 matters of possession of cannabis and supplying BZP.' "Whether the offender's early guilty plea, remorse, rehabilitation efforts, health issues and harsher custody conditions mitigated sentence." "Whether the offender's prior history and commission of the offence while on a s 11 remand required personal deterrence and full-time imprisonment." 'Whether special circumstances justified enlarging the period of eligibility for parole at the expense of the non-parole period.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's supply of methylamphetamine, with Form 1 matters involving cannabis and BZP, was objectively serious and not at the bottom of the range because he possessed multiple drug tablets and there was evidence consistent with drug supply. Although he pleaded guilty early, expressed remorse, had health and custody hardship issues, and was undertaking rehabilitation, his criminal history and commission of the offences while on a s 11 remand required personal deterrence and a sentence of full-time imprisonment. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period, resulting in a non-parole period of fourteen months and a head sentence of twenty-eight months.

Court Disposition

Sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of fourteen months and a head sentence of twenty-eight months.

Orders

  • ['The offender is sentenced to imprisonment, taking into account the matters on the Form 1.' 'A non-parole period of fourteen months is set to date from 25 August 2009 and to end on 24 October 2010, on which day the offender is to be released to parole.' 'The head sentence is twenty-eight months.' 'On release to...