R v Abdullah TERKMANI [2008] NSWDC 358

R v Abdullah TERKMANI [2008] NSWDC 358

Although the offence was grave and required full-time imprisonment, comparable Court of Criminal Appeal authorities, the relatively short duration of the offence, limited planning and spontaneous violence meant it fell just below the middle of the range of objective seriousness. In any event, the offender's age, family and employment support, and prospects of rehabilitation provided reasons to depart from the five-year standard non-parole period. Special circumstances justified fixing a two-year non-parole period within an overall four-year sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Aggravated Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence / Sentencing After Jury Verdict of Guilty
Outcome
Offender sentenced to imprisonment for four years with a non-parole period of two years.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'objective Seriousness' 'circumstances of Aggravation' 'mitigating Factors' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['aggravated Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'objective Seriousness' 'circumstances of Aggravation' 'mitigating Factors' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' 'special Circumstances']

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 Aggravated Break Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence / Sentencing After Jury Verdict of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the standard non-parole period of five years should be applied.' 'Where the offence fell in the range of objective seriousness.' 'Whether aggravating and mitigating circumstances under s 21A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 justified departure from the standard non-parole period.' 'Whether special circumstances justified varying the ratio between the non-parole period and the balance of the term.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence was grave and required full-time imprisonment, comparable Court of Criminal Appeal authorities, the relatively short duration of the offence, limited planning and spontaneous violence meant it fell just below the middle of the range of objective seriousness. In any event, the offender's age, family and employment support, and prospects of rehabilitation provided reasons to depart from the five-year standard non-parole period. Special circumstances justified fixing a two-year non-parole period within an overall four-year sentence.

Court Disposition

Offender sentenced to imprisonment for four years with a non-parole period of two years.

Orders

  • ['Non-parole period of two years from 27 August 2008 until 26 August 2010.' 'Balance of term of two years from 27 August 2010 to 26 August 2012.' 'No orders as to parole because the sentence is over three years.']