SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Harmouche |
Citation: | [2020] ACTSC 194 |
Hearing Dates: | 25 May, 17 June, and 15 July 2020 |
DecisionDate: | 15 July 2020 |
Before: | Murrell CJ |
Decision: | Offender sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment, suspended after five months on entering into a good behaviour order. |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – Trafficking in a controlled drug other than cannabis – Guilty plea – COVID-19 pandemic |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes (Sentencing) Act 2005 (ACT) s 12 Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 603(7) Criminal Code Regulation 2005 (ACT) sch 1 |
Cases Cited: | |
Texts Cited: | Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, Illicit Drug Data Report 2017–2018 (July 2019) |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Saad Harmouche (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel P Dixon (Crown) T Jackson (Offender) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecution (Crown) Aulich (Offender) | |
File Number: | SCC 67 of 2020 |
Murrell CJ
Introduction
The offender pleaded guilty to the offence that, on 9 December 2019, he trafficked in a controlled drug other than cannabis (cocaine), contrary to s 603(7) of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT). The maximum penalty for the offence is 10 years’ imprisonment, a fine of $160,000, or both.
The trafficable quantity for cocaine is six grams: Criminal Code Regulation 2005 (ACT) sch 1. The commercial quantity is three kilograms and a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment applies for trafficking in the commercial quantity.
The plea was entered in the Magistrates Court following an initial plea of not guilty and the preparation of a brief of evidence by the prosecution. At the time that the plea was entered, the offender agreed with the prosecution as to the facts upon which the plea was entered and this matter did not require subsequent exploration.
On 25 May 2020, during the first hearing of this matter, I made an order revoking bail.
Facts
On 9 December 2019, police executed search warrants at the offender's Chisholm residence. They contacted the offender, who returned home. At the scene, the offender admitted that he was the sole occupant of the house, which was of obvious assistance to the prosecuting authorities.
During the search, police located two packages. The first was a plastic freezer bag that contained five snap-lock bags. The second was a fabric wrap. These packages were in a cavity in the wall behind the oven. Each of the two main packages contained a white powder; the combined weight of the contents was 389.23 grams.
The plastic freezer bag (with the five snap-lock bags) weighed 135.439 grams and contained cocaine of 35 per cent purity. The cocaine in that bag had been cut with two substances, benzocaine and levamisole, although the percentage of those substances within the total is unknown.
The fabric wrap contained 253.791 grams of cocaine with a purity of 42.4 per cent. That cocaine had been cut with levamisole and there was no benzocaine in that package.
Police…
Continue reading R v Harmouche
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Harmouche [2020] ACTSC 194
- Case
- [2020] ACTSC 194
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered various factors, including the nature and circumstances of the offence, the offender's background, and the impact of the pandemic. The court emphasised the importance of maintaining public health and safety during the pandemic, while also considering the offender's remorse and cooperation with authorities. The court noted that a custodial sentence was necessary to deter and denounce the offence, but also to reflect the need for rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
After weighing these factors, the court sentenced Mr Harmouche to 14 months’ imprisonment, to be suspended after five months, subject to the offender entering into a good behaviour order. The court acknowledged the impact of the pandemic on the offender's ability to serve a custodial sentence, but also emphasised the need for a sentence that maintained public confidence in the criminal justice system. The court took into account the offender's guilty plea and cooperation with authorities, which resulted in a reduced sentence compared to what might have been imposed in normal circumstances.
The court ordered that Mr Harmouche be sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment, to be suspended after five months, and that he enter into a good behaviour order for a period of 12 months. The court also ordered that Mr Harmouche pay a fine of $5,000, subject to any remission for time served. The court emphasised the importance of rehabilitation and reintegration into society, and ordered that Mr Harmouche participate in a drug and alcohol treatment program as a condition of his good behaviour order.
Orders
Orders of the court
Offender sentenced to 14 months’ imprisonment, suspended after five months on entering into a good behaviour order.
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.