District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Kamara; R v Kassem [2019] NSWDC 947 Hearing dates: 19 July 2019 Date of orders: 19 July 2019 Decision date: 19 July 2019 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: M L Williams SC DCJ Decision: Kamara: An aggregate term of imprisonment of three years with a non-parole period of one year, ten months;
Kassem: An aggregate term of imprisonment of two years, 10 months with a non-parole period of one year, eight months: at [48].
Catchwords: CRIME — Drug offences — Ongoing supply — Supply prohibited drug
SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Breach of conditional liberty — Planned or organised criminal activity
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty — Remorse — Rehabilitation
SENTENCING — Penalties — Imprisonment
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Co-offenders — Deterrence — Factual basis for sentence — Form 1 offences — General principles — Multiple offence — Objective seriousness
SENTENCING — Subjective considerations on sentence — Age of offender — Drug addiction — Special circumstances
Legislation Cited: Cases Cited: Attorney General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
R v Qutami (2001) 127 A Crim R 369
Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144
Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284
Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown)
Omaru Kamara (Offender)
Ahmed Kassem (Offender)Representation: Mr N Leach (Crown)
Mr E Tabchouri (Solicitor for Kamara)
Mr G Stanton (Counsel for Kassem)
File Number(s): 2019/384351; 2017/384352; 2018/311439
Judgment
-
Two relatively young men, Omaru Kamara and Ahmed Kassem, aged 30 and 31 respectively, came under the attention of a police strike force which was established to investigate the street level of supply of prohibited drugs from within licensed premises in the Kings Cross area. The strike force was established to investigate the ongoing drug supply by these two men.
-
Investigators used a variety of investigative techniques including authorised persons to make purchases, conducting covert surveillance and lawfully intercepting communications from both of the offender’s telephones. It was discovered during the course of their investigation that Kamara and Kassem had run their businesses from various hotels within the Sydney CBD where they received telephone calls from people known to them and these people either placed orders on behalf of customers at clubs or for themselves. They supplied cocaine and MDMA.
-
They appear for sentence, both having pleaded guilty at an early opportunity, which justifies a 25% discount on a term of imprisonment due to the utilitarian value of the plea, facing a number of serious charges involving drug dealing and supply.
-
The Crown Prosecutor’s documents have unusually but very helpfully specified the individual charges each of them are facing together with the charges taken into account in some cases on a Form 1 and the principal charges…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Kamara; R v Kassem and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2019] NSWDC 947
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, considering the principles of sentencing and the relevant factors. In determining the appropriate penalties, the court recognised the planned and organised nature of the criminal activity as an aggravating factor, along with the breach of conditional liberty. However, the court also took into account the mitigating factors, such as the appellants' early guilty pleas, their expressions of remorse, and their potential for rehabilitation. Furthermore, the court compared the sentences of the appellants with those of their co-offenders and evaluated the objective seriousness of the offences committed.
After carefully considering all the relevant factors, the court concluded that the sentences imposed on Kamara and Kassem were appropriate and proportionate. The court acknowledged the aggravating factors but also recognised the mitigating factors and the need for individualised sentencing. The court found that the sentences reflected the objective seriousness of the multiple offences, while also taking into account the appellants' personal circumstances and potential for rehabilitation. The sentences of three years and two years, 10 months with non-parole periods of one year, ten months and one year, eight months, respectively, were affirmed.
The court's final orders were to maintain the sentences as determined by the lower court, with the non-parole periods as specified. The appellants' appeals against their sentences were dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Kamara: An aggregate term of imprisonment of three years with a non-parole period of one year, ten months;
Kassem: An aggregate term of imprisonment of two years, 10 months with a non-parole period of one year, eight months: at [48].
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.