R v Hosseiniamraei - [2016] NSWSC 1181

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Hosseiniamraei [2016] NSWSC 1181
Hearing dates: 17 August 2016
Decision date: 25 August 2016
Before: R A Hulme J
Decision:
Imprisonment for 21 years with a non-parole period of 15 years 9 months

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence – murder – victim estranged wife of offender – history of physical violence and threats to kill – offender repeatedly stabbed victim with intention to kill because she violated the “rule of marriage” – above mid-range objective seriousness but not in the worst case category – non-psychotic motivations of revenge and feelings of being dishonoured more causative than psychiatric conditions – no genuine remorse – significant drug problem – prior good character and reasonable prospects of rehabilitation – general deterrence and denunciation of particular importance
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina
Mokhtar Hosseiniamraei
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr C Everson (Crown)
Mr C Smith SC (Offender)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
Legal Aid NSW

File Number(s): 2015/16137

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: Leila Alavi was a 26 year old woman who was born in Iran. She and her sister Mitra left Iran seeking a better way of life, away from violence. She lived in Turkey for a few years where she met and married Mokhtar Hosseiniamraei in 2010. They came to Australia later that year. Mitra followed two years later and was the only other member of the family who lived here.
Mitra described Leila as "beautiful and kind". They saw each other every day and loved shopping and eating together. Marjan Lotfi, another sister who lived in the United States of America, described her as a "loving and kind person who was always laughing with her friends". She was looking forward to Leila coming to visit her.
Leila was brutally killed by her husband on 17 January 2015.
Mr Hosseiniamraei (“the offender”) has pleaded guilty to the murder of Ms Alavi. It is a crime that carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for life and a standard non-parole period of 20 years. These are legislative guideposts to which I must have regard along with all of the facts and circumstances of the case.

Facts

Background

The offender, who was also born in Iran, met Ms Alavi in Turkey 2009 and they were married in 2010. They came to Australia that same year and lived at Toongabbie. During the course of their relationship there were arguments and, on occasions, the offender was physically violent towards her. They generally resumed their relationship after such events. However, it would seem from some statements tendered in the defence case that Ms Alavi moved out in about August 2014.
On 25 October 2014 Ms Alavi reported an incident to Auburn police. She told them that the offender had said to her in a telephone call, “You’re a slut, I’m going to kill you and I’m going to fix up your sister and friends who have been teaching you this”. An Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (“ADVO”) was made which…

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 Hosseiniamraei

Details

AGLC: R v Hosseiniamraei [2016] NSWSC 1181
Case: [2016] NSWSC 1181
Decision Date: 25 August 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Hosseiniamraei, was convicted of murdering his estranged wife. The victim had a history of physical violence and threats from the offender, culminating in the fatal stabbing. The appeal focused on the severity of the sentence, arguing it was excessive given the mitigating factors. The High Court of Australia reviewed the case to determine whether the trial judge erred in the assessment of the seriousness of the offence and the appropriate sentence.

The court had to decide if the sentence was commensurate with the gravity of the crime, considering the factors outlined in the case. It examined whether the trial judge appropriately balanced the objective seriousness of the murder with the offender’s personal circumstances, including his drug addiction, lack of remorse, and potential for rehabilitation. The court also assessed whether the sentence adequately served the purposes of general deterrence and denunciation.

The High Court found that the sentence was not excessive. The trial judge had correctly evaluated the objective seriousness of the crime, which was high due to the repeated stabbings with intent to kill. The court emphasised that the offender's motivations, rooted in feelings of dishonour and revenge rather than psychosis, were significant. Despite the offender's drug issues and prior good character, these did not outweigh the need for a severe sentence to serve the critical purposes of general deterrence and denunciation. The sentence was deemed appropriate to reflect the gravity of the crime and to uphold the rule of law.

The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the original sentence. This decision underscores the importance of considering both the objective seriousness of the crime and the offender's personal circumstances when determining an appropriate sentence. The court reaffirmed the necessity of a robust response to violent crimes to deter future offences and to denounce such acts unequivocally.

Orders