El-Helou v R [2014] NSWCCA 209

El-Helou v R [2014] NSWCCA 209

The appellant had a justifiable sense of grievance because the parity between sentences for supply offences did not reflect the significant differences between the appellant and co-offender's offences and roles, especially given the concurrency of the co-offender’s sentences for more serious and multiple offences. Additional evidence showed the appellant’s lower culpability; this, combined with the parity issue, warranted re-sentencing to a reduced term.

Parties
Appellant: Gary Mathew El-Helou; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against sentence allowed; appellant resentenced.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Parity Principle, Drug Offences, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Parity Principle Drug Offences Appeal Against Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 21
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gary Mathew El-Helou

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a justifiable sense of grievance due to disparity between his sentence and the co-offender's sentence
  2. 2 Whether additional evidence about the appellant's role warranted a lesser sentence
  3. 3 Whether an error occurred in application of the standard non-parole period in appellant's re-sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant had a justifiable sense of grievance because the parity between sentences for supply offences did not reflect the significant differences between the appellant and co-offender's offences and roles, especially given the concurrency of the co-offender’s sentences for more serious and multiple offences. Additional evidence showed the appellant’s lower culpability; this, combined with the parity issue, warranted re-sentencing to a reduced term.

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence allowed; appellant resentenced.

Orders

  • Allow the appellant's appeal against sentence.
  • Set aside order 4 made by this Court on 21 May 2010 and in lieu thereof: (a) set aside the orders of the District Court made on 10 July 2009; (b) sentence the appellant to 10 years imprisonment comprising a non-parole period of 6 years and 8 months commencing on 11 July 2008 and expiring on 10 March 2015, and a...