Mohamed Osman v The Queen Summary

MOHAMED OSMAN v THE QUEEN
[2005] ACTSC 29 (4 April 2005)

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT

No. SCA 1 of 2005

Judge: Higgins CJ
Supreme Court of the ACT
Date: 4 April 2005

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE  )
  )  No. SCA 1 of 2005
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY  )

ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATES COURT

BETWEEN:MOHAMED OSMAN
Appellant

AND:THE QUEEN
Respondent

ORDER

Judge:  Higgins CJ
Date:  4 April 2005
Place:  Canberra

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The appeal be upheld to the extent that the resultant sentences, imposed in the Magistrates Court, commenced 10 October 2002 and expire 1 April 2008.

2. The appellant be eligible for parole on 11 October 2005.

I think an appropriate course in this case is to confirm each of the individual sentences which were imposed by their Worships and that includes the proposition that the sentences they imposed were in the one case 15 months, to serve nine, and in the other case, 12 months, to serve three; that is three months if it is to be consecutive upon Magistrate Doogan’s sentence.

Now, it seems to me, however, their Worships have unfortunately not expressed the resultant sentence terribly correctly. It seems to me that resultant sentence is as follows.

The appellant is to be re-sentenced according to Magistrate Doogan’s requirements for rehabilitation. For the term of imprisonment commencing on 10 October 2002 and expiring on 1 April 2008, he is not to be eligible for parole until 11 October 2005.

While Magistrate Doogan, when she expressed the sentences, said that they were to expire on 9 January 2008, I think she is wrong. It is another error that I am correcting. That should have been 1 April 2008.

I certify that the preceding four (4) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of his Honour, Chief Justice Higgins.
Associate:
Date: 4 April 2005

Counsel for the Appellant: Ms T Warwick

Solicitor for the Appellant: S & T Lawyers

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr D Morters

Solicitor for the Respondent: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
(ACT)

Date of hearing: 4 April 2005

Date of judgment: 4 April 2005

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Mohamed Osman v The Queen, the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory was asked to review an appeal made by the appellant against his sentences. The appellant had been sentenced by the Magistrates Court to a series of imprisonment terms, which were to be served consecutively. The court was required to determine whether the sentences imposed by the Magistrates Court were appropriate and whether the resultant sentence was correctly calculated.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Magistrates Court had correctly calculated the resultant sentence for the appellant. The court was also required to consider whether the Magistrates Court had correctly applied the principles of sentencing in imposing the sentences. The court examined the individual sentences imposed and the manner in which they were to be served consecutively. The court found that while the Magistrates Court had correctly imposed the individual sentences, there were errors in calculating the resultant sentence and the date of parole eligibility.

The court found that the Magistrates Court had imposed appropriate sentences for the appellant's offences. However, the court identified errors in the calculation of the resultant sentence and the date of parole eligibility. The court held that the appellant was to be re-sentenced according to the requirements for rehabilitation as determined by Magistrate Doogan. The court also corrected the expiry date of the sentence, finding that it should expire on 1 April 2008 rather than 9 January 2008 as initially stated by the Magistrates Court. The court confirmed that the appellant would not be eligible for parole until 11 October 2005.

The court ordered that the appeal be upheld to the extent that the resultant sentences, imposed in the Magistrates Court, commence on 10 October 2002 and expire on 1 April 2008. The appellant was also to be eligible for parole on 11 October 2005.

Mohamed Osman v The Queen

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established