R v Fahmy

[2015] NSWDC 382

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v FAHMY [2015] NSWDC 382
Hearing dates:	27/11/2015
Decision date:	18 December 2015
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months with a non-parole period of 6 months.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL – Sentence, ongoing supply of a prohibited drug, methylamphetamine, offence committed on conditional liberty.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1995
Cases Cited:	R v BP [2010] NSWCCA R v Bloomfield (1998) 44 NSWLR 734 R v Cacciola (1998) 104 A Crim R 178 EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36 Fayd’herbe v R [2007] NSWCCA 20 R v Hearne [2001] NSW CCA 37 R v Kairouz [2005] NSWCCA 247 RCW v R (No 2) ([2014] NSWCCA 190 Ragendra v R [2014] NSWCCA 113 R v Smiroldo [2000] NSWCCA 120
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown Amin Fahmy - Offender
Representation:	Counsel: Mr C Patrick - Crown   Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions - Crown A Turner Lawyer - Offender
File Number(s):	2013/378635

SENTENCE

1. HIS HONOUR: I propose to sentence you to 18 months imprisonment. That sentence will date on my calculation from 8 August 2015 and in relation to that sentence I propose to fix a non parole period of 6 months which will date from 8 August 2015 and expire on 7 February 2016.

2. Amin Fahmy appears today for sentence in relation to an offence of ongoing supply of a prohibited drug to whit methylamphetamine, a crime committed by him between 22 May 2013 and 30 May 2013 at Bankstown for financial reward. This is a charge brought contrary to s 21A(1) Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1995 and carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment. There is no standard non parole period. There is provision for a fine of up to 3,500 penalty units.

3. The prisoner was convicted of that charge after trial. The Crown had charged him with the principal charge, as I will call it, and alternative counts of supplying the individual supplies that constitute the three supplies that give rise to the charge under s 25A. The jury’s verdict of guilty on the principal account thus required no consideration of the alternative counts.

4. The three supplies, the subject of the indictment, occurred on 23, 27 and 29 May at Bankstown. The individual supplies relate to very small quantities almost, but not quite, the smallest quantities that could be individually supplied, in my experience. The quantities in question, taking the information from the analyst’s certificate, were 0.16 grams, 0.14 grams and 0.12 grams. In drug parlance a point is point one of a gram, and although there Is a degree of inexactitude in supplying prohibited drugs, and no doubt a deal of “cheating” by suppliers in the provision of drugs to their customers, generally speaking one would find in most instances the minimum quantity that would be provided of a particular prohibited drug such as…