Legal Research
Cases
R v Ibrahim

R v Ibrahim

Case [2020] NSWDC 257 21 May 2020

Sentencing

Breach of Trust

Self-Defence

Rehabilitation Efforts

Plea of Guilty

Prior Criminal Record

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Ibrahim [2020] NSWDC 257
Hearing dates: 24 January 2020, 6 March 2020, 21 May 2020
Date of orders: 21 May 2020
Decision date: 21 May 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:
See [120]

Catchwords:
SENTENCING – Supply prohibited drug not less than commercial quantity – Supply prohibited drug greater than indictable but not less than commercial quantity – Supply prohibited drug not less than indictable quantity – Section 166 matters – Offender found with gamma butyrolactone and methylamphetamine – Offender caught during police operation – Anxiety and depression reduced moral culpability – Self-induced intoxication at time of offending did not mitigate sentence – Offending ranged from lower end to at the mid-range of objective seriousness – Plea of guilty – 25% discount in relation to Sequence 3 and matters on s 166 certificate – Whether ss 25D and 25E of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 applied – Where Offender came to Australia as a refugee – History of drug abuse and poor mental health – Potential impact of COVID-19 on Offender – Expression of genuine remorse – Prior criminal record – Rehabilitation efforts impressive, with good prospects of rehabilitation

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 527C(1)(a)
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), s 276
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5(1), 10A, 21A, 22, 24, 25A, 25B, 25D, 25E, 54B
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 166(1)
Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 10(1), 25(1), 25(2)
Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW), s 16(1)
Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), s 54(1)(a)

Cases Cited:
Cicciarello v R [2009] NSWCCA 272
Huang v R [2017] NSWCCA 312.
Parente v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284
R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
R v Qi [2019] NSWCCA 73
R v RC [2020] NSWCCA 76
R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; 115 A Crim R 104; [2000] NSWCCA 309
R v Webb (2004) 149 A Crim R 167
R v West [2014] NSWCCA 250
R v Yildiz (2006) 160 A Crim R 218; [2006] NSWCCA 97
Scott v R [2020] NSWCCA 81
Vu v R [2006] NSWCCA 188

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Ahmed Salameh, aka Ahmed Ibrahim (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr G. Marr (Offender)
Solicitors:
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Mark Davis Legal (Offender)

File Number(s): 2018/244594
Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

Ahmed Salameh also known as Ahmed Ibrahim (the Offender) appeared for sentence in relation to a number of matters as follows:-

Sequence 1: that between 13 July 2018 and 8 August 2018 inclusive, at Sydney in the State of New South Wales, he did agree to supply a prohibited drug, namely gamma butyrolactone, [1] in an amount not less than the commercial quantity for that drug, namely 3.7 kilograms. This is an offence contrary to s 25(2) of the Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). [2] It carries a maximum…

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 Ibrahim

Details

AGLC: R v Ibrahim [2020] NSWDC 257
Case: [2020] NSWDC 257
Decision Date: 21 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Ibrahim, the appellant was convicted for various drug-related offences, including supplying prohibited drugs in quantities that exceeded both indictable and commercial thresholds. The matter was heard in the District Court of New South Wales, where the appellant's sentencing was contested. The central legal issues revolved around determining the appropriate sentence given the nature of the offences, the appellant's background, and mitigating factors such as mental health issues and the impact of COVID-19.

The court was required to assess the appellant's culpability and consider statutory provisions, including sections 25D and 25E of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, which pertain to the sentencing of refugees. The appellant's history of drug abuse, mental health issues, and the potential effects of COVID-19 were thoroughly examined. The court also took into account the appellant's genuine remorse, efforts at rehabilitation, and prior criminal history. Given the appellant's plea of guilty, the court applied a 25% discount in relation to certain matters, as stipulated by the legislation.

After considering all the factors, the court determined that the appropriate sentence would fall within the mid-range of objective seriousness for the offences committed. The court recognised the appellant's efforts towards rehabilitation and the potential positive impact of these efforts on his future. The court ultimately decided that the appellant should serve a sentence that reflected the seriousness of the offences while also considering the mitigating factors. The specific details of the sentence and any other orders were outlined in the judgment at paragraph 120.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [120]

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Ibrahim [2020] NSWDC 257

Most Recent Citation

Ibrahim v The The Queen [2022] NSWCCA 134

Cases citing this decision · 1 of 1 shown

Ibrahim v The The Queen
[2022] NSWCCA 134 Para 9

…The factual background was summarised by Hatzistergos DCJ in R v Ibrahim [2020] NSWDC 257 (the sentencing judgment) at [6]-[13]:…

View all 1 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 16 of 16 shown

Scott v R
[2020] NSWCCA 81 Para 76

…what would be the case of a prisoner not so compromised. [33] It is appropriate that this be taken into consideration. 32. Exhibit 14. 33. Scott v R [2020] NSWCCA 81 at [166] and RC v R; R v RC [2020] NSWCCA 76 at [253]-[255].…
RC v R; R v RC
[2020] NSWCCA 76 Para 74

…v RC [31] was distinguishable and the Court would not attribute weight to this Offender’s condition given his relatively young age and health. 31. [2020] NSWCCA 76.…
R v Qi
[2019] NSWCCA 73 Para 99

…Two cases were cited in support being Parente v R [42] and R v Qi. [43] 42. (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284. 43. [2019] NSWCCA 73.…
Huang v R
[2017] NSWCCA 312 Para 16

…offence of this kind. [15] I am not satisfied that this aggravating factor has been established. 14. Cicciarello v R [2009] NSWCCA 272. 15. Huang v R [2017] NSWCCA 312.…
Parente v R
[2017] NSWCCA 285 Para 99

…Two cases were cited in support being Parente v R [42] and R v Qi. [43] 42. (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284. 43. [2019] NSWCCA 73.…
Parente v R
[2017] NSWCCA 284 Para 99

…Two cases were cited in support being Parente v R [42] and R v Qi. [43] 42. (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284. 43. [2019] NSWCCA 73.…
R v West
[2014] NSWCCA 250 Para 111

…o 11 April 2019. I further bear in mind the stringent bail conditions to which he has otherwise been subject to in fixing sentence. [50] 49. R v West [2014] NSWCCA 250 per Adamson J at [40] citing Wiggins v R [2010] NSWCCA 30 at [3]-[8] and [14] per Howie J, Harrison J agreeing. 50. R v Webb (2004) 149 A Crim R 167…
Muldrock v The Queen
[2011] HCA 39 Para 109

…case of Sequence 1, the standard non-parole period. [48] 48. R v Parente (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284 at [111], citing Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120 at 132 [27] and Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357 at 372 [31].…
Wiggins v R
[2010] NSWCCA 30 Para 111

…conditions to which he has otherwise been subject to in fixing sentence. [50] 49. R v West [2014] NSWCCA 250 per Adamson J at [40] citing Wiggins v R [2010] NSWCCA 30 at [3]-[8] and [14] per Howie J, Harrison J agreeing. 50. R v Webb (2004) 149 A Crim R 167 at [18].…
Cicciarello v R
[2009] NSWCCA 272 Para 16

…han what would be expected of an offence of this kind. [15] I am not satisfied that this aggravating factor has been established. 14. Cicciarello v R [2009] NSWCCA 272. 15. Huang v R [2017] NSWCCA 312.…
Vu v R
[2006] NSWCCA 188

…R v West [2014] NSWCCA 250 R v Yildiz (2006) 160 A Crim R 218; [2006] NSWCCA 97 Scott v R [2020] NSWCCA 81 Vu v R [2006] NSWCCA 188 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Ahmed Salameh, aka Ahmed Ibrahim (Offender) Representation: Counsel: Mr G. Marr (Offender) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)…
R v Yildiz
[2006] NSWCCA 97 Para 15

…am not satisfied that the planning involved in the subject offences gave rise to the aggravating factor. 13. R v Yildiz (2006) 160 A Crim R 218; [2006] NSWCCA 97.…
Markarian v The Queen
[2005] HCA 25 Para 109

…48. R v Parente (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284 at [111], citing Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120 at 132 [27] and Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357 at 372 [31].…
Morawski v State Rail Authority
[2000] NSWCCA 309 Para 32

…999 Act is appropriate in accordance with R v Thomson and Houlton . [22] 21. See s 25A(1) of the 1999 Act. 22. (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; 115 A Crim R 104; [2000] NSWCCA 309.…
R v Thomson; R v Houlton
[2000] NSWCCA 383 Para 32

…discount of 25% pursuant s 22 of the 1999 Act is appropriate in accordance with R v Thomson and Houlton . [22] 21. See s 25A(1) of the 1999 Act. 22. (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; 115 A Crim R 104; [2000] NSWCCA 309.…
R v Henry
[1999] NSWCA 111 Para 26

…at the time. Furthermore any suggestion of self-induced intoxication at the time the offending would not mitigate sentence. [19] 18. R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 at [198]. 19. S 21A(5AA) of the 1999 Act.…

Legislation cited in this decision · 7

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
10A, 21A, 22, 24, 25A, 25B, 25D, 25E, 3A... 12 mentions (from Para 1)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
10(1), 25(1), 25(2) 4 mentions (from Para 1)
Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW)
276 2 mentions (from Para 77)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
527C(1)(a) 2 mentions (from Para 5)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
166(1) 2 mentions (from Para 2)
Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW)
16(1) 2 mentions (from Para 4)
Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW)
54(1)(a) 2 mentions (from Para 1)

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Ibrahim [2020] NSWDC 257
Hearing dates:	24 January 2020, 6 March 2020, 21 May 2020
Date of orders:	21 May 2020
Decision date:	21 May 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Hatzistergos DCJ
Decision:	See [120]
Catchwords:	SENTENCING – Supply prohibited drug not less than commercial quantity – Supply prohibited drug greater than indictable but not less than commercial quantity – Supply prohibited drug not less than indictable quantity – Section 166 matters – Offender found with gamma butyrolactone and methylamphetamine – Offender caught during police operation – Anxiety and depression reduced moral culpability – Self-induced intoxication at time of offending did not mitigate sentence – Offending ranged from lower end to at the mid-range of objective seriousness – Plea of guilty – 25% discount in relation to Sequence 3 and matters on s 166 certificate – Whether ss 25D and 25E of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 applied – Where Offender came to Australia as a refugee – History of drug abuse and poor mental health – Potential impact of COVID-19 on Offender – Expression of genuine remorse – Prior criminal record – Rehabilitation efforts impressive, with good prospects of rehabilitation
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 527C(1)(a) Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW), s 276 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5(1), 10A, 21A, 22, 24, 25A, 25B, 25D, 25E, 54B Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 166(1) Drugs, Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 10(1), 25(1), 25(2) Poisons and Therapeutic Goods Act 1966 (NSW), s 16(1) Road Transport Act 2013 (NSW), s 54(1)(a)
Cases Cited:	Cicciarello v R [2009] NSWCCA 272 Huang v R [2017] NSWCCA 312. Parente v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v Qi [2019] NSWCCA 73 R v RC [2020] NSWCCA 76 R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; 115 A Crim R 104; [2000] NSWCCA 309 R v Webb (2004) 149 A Crim R 167 R v West [2014] NSWCCA 250 R v Yildiz (2006) 160 A Crim R 218; [2006] NSWCCA 97 Scott v R [2020] NSWCCA 81 Vu v R [2006] NSWCCA 188
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Ahmed Salameh, aka Ahmed Ibrahim (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr G. Marr (Offender) Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Mark Davis Legal (Offender)
File Number(s):	2018/244594
Publication restriction:	Nil