R v Hagali, Rabbeh - [2017] NSWDC 379

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v HAGALI, Rabbeh [2017] NSWDC 379
Hearing dates: 10 August 2017 and 6 October 2017
Date of orders: 26 October 2017
Decision date: 26 October 2017
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [89]

Catchwords: CRIMINAL – Sentence – deal with the proceeds of crime – $200,000 bank cheque – Form 1 matter to be considered – attempt to deal with the proceeds of crime - $500,000 – disputed facts issue raised – offender played a major role in directing others to fraudulently obtain the bank cheque – 39 years old – married with a young child – low to medium risk of re-offending – prior offences of dishonesty – small reduction in the full discount for the plea of guilty due to the offenders unsuccessful disputed facts application – two co-accused already sentenced – parity of sentencing considered – first time in custody – special circumstances found to enable the prisoner to re-adjust to community living upon release
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Victims Rights and Support Act 2013
Cases Cited: Attorney General’s Application No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147
R v AB [2011] NSWCCA 229
R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383
R v Thompson and Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Rabbeh Hagali (Offender)
Representation: Counsel:
Ms Poulos (DPP Solicitor)
Mr Brezniack (Counsel)

File Number(s): 2016/00021235
Publication restriction: Nil

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: The prisoner, Rabbeh Hagali, appears today for sentence in relation to an offence contrary to s 193B(2) Crimes Act 1900, particularised in the Court attendance notice. It alleges against the prisoner that he on the 16th day of July 2015 at Maroubra in the State of New South Wales did deal with the proceeds of crime; to wit a $200,000 bank cheque number 653975‑082012‑1027406, knowing it was the proceeds of crime. That is an offence that carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment, I am informed. It has no standard non‑parole period.
There is a matter to be taken into account of a Form 1. This is an offence committed on 27 July 2015 at Marrickville, alleging that the prisoner on 27 and 28 July 2016 at Marrickville in the State of New South Wales did deal with the proceeds of crime, to wit $500,000, knowing that it was the proceeds of crime (attempt). That Court attendance notice is not very elegantly pleaded. No issue has been taken as to its form. It is an offence contrary to the same provision if dealt with on indictment it carries a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment.
This matter came before me on the basis that it was a case that involved what were claimed to be "disputed facts." In order to resolve the relevant disputed fact, which I will identify from the statement of facts provided by the Crown shortly, I heard evidence from 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 Hagali, Rabbeh

Details

AGLC: R v Hagali, Rabbeh [2017] NSWDC 379
Case: [2017] NSWDC 379
Decision Date: 26 October 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Hagali, Rabbeh, was convicted on one count of dealing with the proceeds of crime, contrary to section 401(1) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). The appeal concerns the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. Hagali was found to have played a significant role in the fraudulent acquisition of a $200,000 bank cheque, although he did not physically obtain the cheque himself. The central legal issue was the determination of an appropriate sentence considering the nature of the offence, the offender's role, and the need to balance the deterrent effect of the sentence with the potential for rehabilitation. Additionally, the court had to consider the plea of guilty and the offender's circumstances, including his age, family situation, and the risk of reoffending.

The court found that Hagali was a 39-year-old married individual with a young child, which indicated a need to consider special circumstances for the purpose of reintegration into the community post-release. The court also noted that Hagali had prior convictions for offences of dishonesty but assessed him as a low to medium risk of reoffending. The appellant's role in the crime, although not directly involving the physical handling of the cheque, was deemed significant. Despite his plea of guilty, Hagali unsuccessfully contested certain disputed facts, which resulted in a minor reduction to the discount for the plea. The court weighed these factors against the need for deterrence and the principle of parity in sentencing with his co-accused, who had already been sentenced.

The Supreme Court determined that a full-time custodial sentence was necessary. It considered the principle of proportionality and the need for a sentence that adequately reflected the gravity of the offence while also considering the offender's potential for rehabilitation. The court imposed a sentence that it believed was fair and appropriate, taking into account all relevant factors, including Hagali's first-time incarceration and the special circumstances related to his family life. The final orders included the imposition of a custodial sentence, with specific conditions and considerations outlined in the detailed judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [89]

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 HAGALI, Rabbeh [2017] NSWDC 379
Hearing dates:	10 August 2017 and 6 October 2017
Date of orders:	26 October 2017
Decision date:	26 October 2017
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [89]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL – Sentence – deal with the proceeds of crime – $200,000 bank cheque – Form 1 matter to be considered – attempt to deal with the proceeds of crime - $500,000 – disputed facts issue raised – offender played a major role in directing others to fraudulently obtain the bank cheque – 39 years old – married with a young child – low to medium risk of re-offending – prior offences of dishonesty – small reduction in the full discount for the plea of guilty due to the offenders unsuccessful disputed facts application – two co-accused already sentenced – parity of sentencing considered – first time in custody – special circumstances found to enable the prisoner to re-adjust to community living upon release
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Victims Rights and Support Act 2013
Cases Cited:	Attorney General’s Application No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 R v AB [2011] NSWCCA 229 R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383 R v Thompson and Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Rabbeh Hagali (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms Poulos (DPP Solicitor) Mr Brezniack (Counsel)
File Number(s):	2016/00021235
Publication restriction:	Nil