R v Mostapha Ali [2016] NSWDC 173

R v Mostapha Ali [2016] NSWDC 173

Having considered all alternatives, no sentence other than imprisonment was appropriate, but the objective seriousness was below the mid-range because the substances contained no prohibited drug, the offending was connected to the offender's addiction and drug debts, and the offender had strong mitigating factors including youth, early guilty plea, remorse, rehabilitation, family support, employment and 140 days already served. A sentence of not more than 2 years was warranted and could be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Committed for Sentence From Queanbeyan Local Court; Remarks on Sentence and Orders
Outcome
Offender sentenced to imprisonment to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order for 18 months; Form 1 matter taken into account; proceeds and destruction orders made.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'commercial Quantity' 'deemed Supply by Representation' 'intensive Corrections Order' 'early Guilty Plea' 'form 1 Offence' 'drug Proceeds Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences' 'confiscation of Proceeds of Crime'] ['supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'commercial Quantity' 'deemed Supply by Representation' 'intensive Corrections Order' 'early Guilty Plea' 'form 1 Offence' 'drug Proceeds Order']

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 Sentence / Committed for Sentence From Queanbeyan Local Court; Remarks on Sentence and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for supplying 215 grams of MDMA and 155 grams of methylamphetamine, where the substances supplied contained no prohibited drug but were deemed prohibited drugs under s 40 of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.' 'Whether the objective seriousness of the offences required full-time custody or allowed an Intensive Corrections Order.' "What weight should be given to the offender's youth, early guilty plea, rehabilitation, drug addiction, 140 days already served in custody, and the Form 1 offence."]

Ratio Decidendi

Having considered all alternatives, no sentence other than imprisonment was appropriate, but the objective seriousness was below the mid-range because the substances contained no prohibited drug, the offending was connected to the offender's addiction and drug debts, and the offender had strong mitigating factors including youth, early guilty plea, remorse, rehabilitation, family support, employment and 140 days already served. A sentence of not more than 2 years was warranted and could be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order.

Court Disposition

Offender sentenced to imprisonment to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order for 18 months; Form 1 matter taken into account; proceeds and destruction orders made.

Orders

  • ['No sentence other than imprisonment is appropriate.' 'The sentence is likely to be for a period of no more than 2 years.' 'The offender is referred for assessment for suitability for an Intensive Corrections Order.' 'The Form 1 matter is certified and taken into account on sentence.' 'The matter is adjourned to 10...