R v Al-Turfi - [2020] NSWDC 912

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Al-Turfi [2020] NSWDC 912
Hearing dates: 8/9/20-16/9/20, 11/12/20, 14/12/20
Date of orders: 14/12/20
Decision date: 14 December 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bourke SC DCJ
Decision:
Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years, to be served by way of Intensive Corrections Order.
The indicative sentences are:
Count 2 – 4 months.
Count 1 – 2 years 11 months
In addition to standard ICO conditions, the following conditions are to apply:
1. Perform 400 hours Community Service.
2. Not to consume alcohol or illegal drugs, and submit to random urinalysis if required by Community Corrections.
3. Participate in any drug, alcohol or other counselling as directed by Community Corrections.
4. Not to be absent from his place of residence between 11pm and 5am, unless accompanied by a parent or his older brother. I note the offender’s residential address is 16 Marie Avenue, Cabramatta West.
The offender is to report to the Fairfield office of Community Corrections by telephone within 48 hours.
In relation to the breach of the s9 bond, bond revoked but I take no further action taken.

Catchwords:
Crime – Sentence – Robbery in company – Dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
R v Henry and Ors [1999] 46 NSWLR 346
Owens v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 16
R v Millwood [2012] NSWCCA 2
Bugmy v R [2013] HCA 37
BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159
R v Zamagias [2002] NSWCCA 17
Waney v DPP [2020] NSWCA 318

Category: Sentence
Parties: NSW DPP – Crown
Abdulmaged Al-Turfi - Offender
Representation: Mr T Buckingham for Crown
Mr M Fokkes for Offender

File Number(s): 2019/32423

Judgment

I note that Mr Al-Turfi is for sentence on two offences today, those being firstly an offence of robbery in company which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment, and secondly an offence of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment. Those maximum penalties are of course guideposts in this sentencing exercise to which I have had regard.
The offender pleaded guilty to the second count when he was arraigned before the jury on 8 September 2020 and he is entitled to a 5% discount on account of having done so in relation to that offence. A trial was conducted in relation to count 1, that being the robbery, and on 16 September 2020, a jury found him guilty of that count.

FACTS

Turning to the facts of the matter. Broadly speaking, the facts of count 1 involve events that took place on 15 December 2018 at Warwick Farm Railway Station in which Mr Kevin Short was robbed of his wallet, keys and money. Count 2, which involves dishonestly obtaining goods from a 7 Eleven store, was committed not long after the robbery when the offender used Mr Short’s bankcard to buy some items from that store.
On the sentence hearing last…

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 Al-Turfi

Details

AGLC: R v Al-Turfi [2020] NSWDC 912
Case: [2020] NSWDC 912
Decision Date: 14 December 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Al-Turfi, was convicted on two counts of robbery in company and dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception. He appealed against his sentence, which was determined by the court to be an aggregate term of imprisonment of three years, to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order (ICO). The court also imposed additional conditions to be met during the ICO, including community service, restrictions on alcohol and drug consumption, participation in counselling programs, and a curfew. The defendant was additionally subject to a revocation of his bond, but no further action was taken in relation to this breach. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was appropriate and whether the additional conditions were justified.

In determining the appropriate sentence, the court considered the defendant’s offending history, his participation in the ICO program, and the need for specific conditions to address his behaviour and risk of reoffending. The court acknowledged the defendant’s limited prior criminal history but highlighted the seriousness of the current offences. The imposition of an ICO was seen as a suitable balance between punishment and rehabilitation, allowing the defendant to remain in the community while receiving structured support. The additional conditions were deemed necessary to address the specific factors contributing to the defendant’s offending behaviour, such as substance abuse and curfew violations.

The court concluded that the sentence and conditions imposed were appropriate, reflecting a balanced approach between punishment and rehabilitation. The specific conditions, including community service and restrictions on substance use, were justified as measures to address the defendant’s risk factors and promote his reintegration into the community. The court also noted the importance of the defendant’s compliance with the ICO program and the conditions as a means of reducing the likelihood of reoffending. The court's decision, therefore, provided a structured pathway for the defendant to address his criminal behaviour while minimising the impact on the broader community.

Orders

Orders of the court

Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years, to be served by way of Intensive Corrections Order.

The indicative sentences are:

Count 2 – 4 months.

Count 1 – 2 years 11 months

In addition to standard ICO conditions, the following conditions are to apply:

1. Perform 400 hours Community Service.

2. Not to consume alcohol or illegal drugs, and submit to random urinalysis if required by Community Corrections.

3. Participate in any drug, alcohol or other counselling as directed by Community Corrections.

4. Not to be absent from his place of residence between 11pm and 5am, unless accompanied by a parent or his older brother. I note the offender’s residential address is 16 Marie Avenue, Cabramatta West.

The offender is to report to the Fairfield office of Community Corrections by telephone within 48 hours.

In relation to the breach of the s9 bond, bond revoked but I take no further action taken.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Al-Turfi [2020] NSWDC 912
Hearing dates:	8/9/20-16/9/20, 11/12/20, 14/12/20
Date of orders:	14/12/20
Decision date:	14 December 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bourke SC DCJ
Decision:	Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years, to be served by way of Intensive Corrections Order. The indicative sentences are: Count 2 – 4 months. Count 1 – 2 years 11 months In addition to standard ICO conditions, the following conditions are to apply: 1. Perform 400 hours Community Service. 2. Not to consume alcohol or illegal drugs, and submit to random urinalysis if required by Community Corrections. 3. Participate in any drug, alcohol or other counselling as directed by Community Corrections. 4. Not to be absent from his place of residence between 11pm and 5am, unless accompanied by a parent or his older brother. I note the offender’s residential address is 16 Marie Avenue, Cabramatta West. The offender is to report to the Fairfield office of Community Corrections by telephone within 48 hours. In relation to the breach of the s9 bond, bond revoked but I take no further action taken.
Catchwords:	Crime – Sentence – Robbery in company – Dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	R v Henry and Ors [1999] 46 NSWLR 346 Owens v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 16 R v Millwood [2012] NSWCCA 2 Bugmy v R [2013] HCA 37 BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 159 R v Zamagias [2002] NSWCCA 17 Waney v DPP [2020] NSWCA 318
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	NSW DPP – Crown Abdulmaged Al-Turfi - Offender
Representation:	Mr T Buckingham for Crown Mr M Fokkes for Offender
File Number(s):	2019/32423