Chehab v The Queen

The appellant was convicted of aggravated break and enter with intent to commit serious indictable offence (larceny) and appealed the sentence imposed by the trial judge. The primary contention was whether the trial judge had erred in failing to properly consider the principle of parity in sentencing, particularly in relation to the appellant's role in the offence. The appellant also argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive, and that the conviction should be based on possession for personal use rather than deemed supply under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW).

The court examined the legal principles surrounding the sentencing process and the role of parity in ensuring that similar offenders receive similar sentences. The court considered the appellant's role in the offence, which was committed while on conditional liberty, and assessed whether the trial judge had adequately taken these factors into account. The court also examined the arguments concerning the excessiveness of the sentence and the interpretation of the deemed supply provision. The court concluded that no error had been made in the application of the parity principle, and that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. The conviction under the deemed supply provision was upheld, rejecting the argument that the possession was for personal use.

In light of the findings, the appeal was dismissed. The trial judge's sentencing decision was affirmed, and the conviction remained intact. The court found that the trial judge had appropriately exercised their discretion, taking into account all relevant factors, including the appellant's role in the offence and the principle of parity. The sentence was deemed appropriate and not manifestly excessive.