R v El Hassan, George
Case
•
[2009] NSWDC 233
•20 August 2009
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v El Hassan, George [2009] NSWDC 233
[2009] NSWDC 233
20 August 2009
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the case of R v El Hassan, George, the defendant was convicted of robbery and breaching a good behaviour bond. The dispute involved the sentence to be imposed after the defendant was found to have assaulted a victim at an ATM, causing disorientation and taking $220. The defendant had been waiting in the area for seven minutes for an opportunity to commit the crime. The matter was heard in the relevant court, where the legal issues centred on the appropriate sentence for the defendant's actions and whether drug dependence was a mitigating factor.
The court had to decide whether the defendant's drug dependence was a sufficient mitigating factor to lessen the severity of the sentence. However, the court rejected this submission, finding that the defendant was a poor historian and had difficulties in accepting reports. The court also considered the need for the defendant to be referred to the compulsory Drug Court for inclusion into the Compulsory Drug Treatment Centre. The court found that the breach of the section 12 bond was proven, and thus, the bond was revoked. The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 12 months and a balance of term of 3 months for the breach of the good behaviour bond.
For the robbery conviction, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 22 months and a balance of term of 14 months. The court also ordered that the defendant be referred to the compulsory Drug Court for inclusion into the Compulsory Drug Treatment Centre. The court considered the need for the defendant to receive drug treatment as part of their rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community from further harm by the defendant. The final orders of the court included the revocation of the defendant's section 12 bond, imprisonment for the breach of the bond and the robbery conviction, and referral to the compulsory Drug Court for drug treatment.
The court had to decide whether the defendant's drug dependence was a sufficient mitigating factor to lessen the severity of the sentence. However, the court rejected this submission, finding that the defendant was a poor historian and had difficulties in accepting reports. The court also considered the need for the defendant to be referred to the compulsory Drug Court for inclusion into the Compulsory Drug Treatment Centre. The court found that the breach of the section 12 bond was proven, and thus, the bond was revoked. The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 12 months and a balance of term of 3 months for the breach of the good behaviour bond.
For the robbery conviction, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 22 months and a balance of term of 14 months. The court also ordered that the defendant be referred to the compulsory Drug Court for inclusion into the Compulsory Drug Treatment Centre. The court considered the need for the defendant to receive drug treatment as part of their rehabilitation and reintegration into society. The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect the community from further harm by the defendant. The final orders of the court included the revocation of the defendant's section 12 bond, imprisonment for the breach of the bond and the robbery conviction, and referral to the compulsory Drug Court for drug treatment.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Criminal Liability
-
Sentencing
-
Breach of Contract
-
Robbery
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v El Hassan, George [2009] NSWDC 233
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
1
CGM investments Pty Ltd v Chelliah
[2003] FCA 79
R v McGourty
[2002] NSWCCA 335
CGM investments Pty Ltd v Chelliah
[2003] FCA 79