R v Malas; R v Chaouk [2020] NSWDC 893

R v Malas; R v Chaouk [2020] NSWDC 893

Chaouk's offending was objectively more serious than Malas's because he occupied a higher position in the supply enterprise, was sentenced for supplying a large commercial quantity, supplied a greater quantity, had a prior drug supply conviction and was on conditional liberty; however, his objective seriousness was somewhat below mid-range, he pleaded guilty, expressed limited remorse and had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation and special circumstances. Malas had a more limited role as a delivery driver, was young, had no identified aggravating factors, pleaded guilty, had health conditions making custody more onerous, and had special circumstances, but his offending still required...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence After Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
Chaouk was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years. Malas was sentenced to an aggregate term of 4 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months.
Legal Topics
['supply Prohibited Drug' 'large Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'form 1 Offences' 'conditional Liberty' 'previous Convictions' 'planned or Organised Criminal Activity' 'plea of Guilty' 'remorse' 'rehabilitation' 'special Circumstances' 'co Offenders' 'deterrence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['supply Prohibited Drug' 'large Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'form 1 Offences' 'conditional Liberty' 'previous Convictions' 'planned or Organised Criminal Activity' 'plea of Guilty' 'remorse' 'rehabilitation' 'special Circumstances' 'co Offenders' 'deterrence']

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 After Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed on Tamir Chaouk for supplying a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, taking into account Form 1 matters and a related common assault offence.' 'What aggregate sentence should be imposed on Mustapha Malas for supplying methylamphetamine, taking into account Form 1 matters and a related proceeds of crime matter.' "How the offenders' objective criminality, relative roles, guilty pleas, records, conditional liberty, youth, health, remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, deterrence and special circumstances affected sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

Chaouk's offending was objectively more serious than Malas's because he occupied a higher position in the supply enterprise, was sentenced for supplying a large commercial quantity, supplied a greater quantity, had a prior drug supply conviction and was on conditional liberty; however, his objective seriousness was somewhat below mid-range, he pleaded guilty, expressed limited remorse and had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation and special circumstances. Malas had a more limited role as a delivery driver, was young, had no identified aggravating factors, pleaded guilty, had health conditions making custody more onerous, and had special circumstances, but his offending still required...

Court Disposition

Chaouk was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 4 years. Malas was sentenced to an aggregate term of 4 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months.

Orders

  • ['Tamir Chaouk is convicted.' 'For Tamir Chaouk, taking into account a 25% discount for the plea of guilty and the Form 1 matters, a sentence of six years imprisonment is imposed commencing 1 February 2019.' 'For Tamir Chaouk, a non-parole period of four years is imposed expiring 31 January 2023.' 'Special...