El Jamal v R [2021] NSWCCA 105

El Jamal v R [2021] NSWCCA 105

The sentencing judge erred by focusing on the applicant's alleged complicity in the importation, a distinct and uncharged offence, and by treating the applicant's involvement in importation as aggravation in sentencing for attempted possession; this necessitated resentencing according to only the charged offence's seriousness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Resentencing
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'attempted Possession of Border Controlled Drugs' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'aggravating Factors' 'culpability Assessment']

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 Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Resentencing

  1. 1 ['Whether sentencing judge erred by taking into account complicity in importation in sentencing for attempted possession' 'Whether sentence was manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by focusing on the applicant's alleged complicity in the importation, a distinct and uncharged offence, and by treating the applicant's involvement in importation as aggravation in sentencing for attempted possession; this necessitated resentencing according to only the charged offence's seriousness.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal allowed' 'Sentence imposed on 1 May 2019 quashed' 'Applicant sentenced to imprisonment for 11 years and 2 months to commence on 31 March 2016 with a non-parole period of 7 years and 3 months' 'Applicant first eligible for parole on 29 June 2023']