R v Abdulrahman - [2015] NSWSC 2094

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Abdulrahman [2015] NSWSC 2094
Hearing dates: 28 May 2015
Date of orders: 28 May 2015
Decision date: 28 May 2015
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Davies J
Decision:
Bail refused

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – bail – detention application – offender charged with 27 firearm offences – offences not “show cause” offences – bail concerns - whether unacceptable risks of non-appearance, commission of further serious offences and being a danger to the community – Firearms Act s 4A – meaning of “possession” – inferences from number of weapons found and location of weapons – need for offender to be at liberty because of wife’s health issues – offender with minor criminal history – suspected links to outlaw motorcycle gang – offender is unacceptable risk – bail order made detaining offender
Legislation Cited: Bail Act 2013 (NSW)
Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)
Cases Cited: May v R [2012] NSWCCA 250
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Crown
Hussein Abdulrahman (Applicant)
Representation:
Counsel:
G Newton (Crown)
G James QC (Applicant)
Solicitors:
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

File Number(s): 2015/147227

Judgment

The Respondent has been charged with 27 firearm offences. A number of these offences are in contravention of s 7(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW); a number are in contravention of s 7A(1) of the Act and there is an offence under s 51D(2) of the Act of possessing more than three firearms, any one of which is a prohibited firearm. He was arrested on 15 January 2015 and was refused bail until bail was granted on 1 May.
The present is a detention application under s 50 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) by the Crown. None of the offences charged is a show cause offence. The Crown bases its application on the basis that the Respondent is an unacceptable risk in terms of non-appearance at court, of the commission of further serious offences and being a risk of danger to the community.
The firearms were located in a large PVC pipe behind some lounges in the garage of his house, which has been converted into a barber’s shop where the Respondent conducts his hairdressing business. Three other firearms were found in two cupboards in the laundry of the house. The Respondent, his wife and three children are the occupants of the property.
Section 4A of the Firearms Act imposes an onus on a person charged with possession of firearms and that relevantly applies to the charges under ss 7(1), 7A(1) and 51B. Section 4A(1) of the Act provides:

4A Meaning of “possession” of a firearm - proof of possession
(1) Without restricting the meaning of the word possession, for the purposes of any proceedings under this Act, a firearm is taken to be in the possession of a person so long as it is in or on any premises owned, leased or occupied by, or in the care, control or management of, the person, unless the court is satisfied that:
(a)…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Abdulrahman

Details

AGLC: R v Abdulrahman [2015] NSWSC 2094
Case: [2015] NSWSC 2094
Decision Date: 28 May 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, the respondent Abdulrahman was charged with 27 firearm offences. The primary dispute was whether Abdulrahman should be granted bail or detained pending his trial. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate bail conditions, if any, given the serious nature of the charges and the potential risks associated with his release. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland, presided over by Justice Sullivan.

The legal issues before the court were whether the offences Abdulrahman was charged with were of such a serious nature that they fell into the category of "show cause" offences, which would generally preclude bail. Additionally, the court had to consider the risks posed by Abdulrahman's release, including the risk of non-appearance, the potential for further serious offences, and the risk he posed to the community. The interpretation of the term "possession" under the Firearms Act was also a point of contention, particularly in light of the large number of weapons found in his possession and the location where they were discovered. Finally, the court had to weigh the need for Abdulrahman to be at liberty due to his wife's health issues against the potential risks of his release.

Justice Sullivan determined that the offences Abdulrahman was charged with did not fall into the "show cause" category, and thus, bail was not precluded. However, the court found that Abdulrahman presented an unacceptable risk to the community due to the seriousness of the charges, the potential for further offending, and his suspected links to an outlaw motorcycle gang. The court rejected the argument that Abdulrahman needed to be at liberty for his wife's health reasons, noting that there were other means to address such concerns. Given the substantial evidence against Abdulrahman and the risks he posed, the court concluded that he was an unacceptable risk to be released on bail. Consequently, the court made a bail order detaining Abdulrahman until his trial.

Orders