GHAZI v R [2006] NSWCCA 320

GHAZI v R [2006] NSWCCA 320

Leave was granted and the sentence quashed because the sentencing judge erred by placing excessive weight on the applicant's limited prior convictions for common assault and possession of a knife in a public place, treating them as if they showed a continuing attitude of disobedience to the law, dangerous propensity, special need for personal deterrence, or need to protect the public. Although the Court did not accept that s.44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) had been misapplied in the manner alleged, the erroneous use of prior convictions and the excessive sentence warranted resentencing to a lesser term.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Resentencing
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced to a lesser sentence.
Legal Topics
['malicious Wounding With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances' 'prior Convictions in Sentencing' 'manifest Excess' 'guilty Plea Discount']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['malicious Wounding With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances' 'prior Convictions in Sentencing' 'manifest Excess' 'guilty Plea Discount']

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 Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge misapplied s.44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) when fixing the non-parole period and balance of sentence.' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the sentencing judge wrongly used the applicant's prior convictions by applying the principles in R v Veen (No. 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted and the sentence quashed because the sentencing judge erred by placing excessive weight on the applicant's limited prior convictions for common assault and possession of a knife in a public place, treating them as if they showed a continuing attitude of disobedience to the law, dangerous propensity, special need for personal deterrence, or need to protect the public. Although the Court did not accept that s.44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) had been misapplied in the manner alleged, the erroneous use of prior convictions and the excessive sentence warranted resentencing to a lesser term.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced to a lesser sentence.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be granted.' 'The sentence imposed on the applicant by his Honour Judge Delaney on 7 June 2005 be quashed.' 'For the offence of maliciously wound with intent to do grievous bodily harm contrary to s.33 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), committed on 15 December 2003, the applicant be sentenced to...