El Jamal v R [2017] NSWCCA 243

El Jamal v R [2017] NSWCCA 243

No error identified in the exercise of the sentencing discretion; the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive considering all circumstances, particularly the applicant's role, the nature and number of firearms, link to criminal activity, and the principles of general deterrence and statutory requirements.

Parties
Applicant: Rami El Jamal; Respondent Crown: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal, Post Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sentence Appeal, Possession of Firearms, Manifest Excess, General Deterrence
Criminal Law Sentence Appeal Possession of Firearms Manifest Excess General 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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rami El Jamal

Applicant

Regina

Respondent Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal, Post Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive for the offence of possessing more than three firearms plus associated Form 1 matters.

Ratio Decidendi

No error identified in the exercise of the sentencing discretion; the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive considering all circumstances, particularly the applicant's role, the nature and number of firearms, link to criminal activity, and the principles of general deterrence and statutory requirements.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal dismissed.