R v Odisho - [2020] NSWDC 922

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Odisho [2020] NSWDC 922
Hearing dates: 18 June 2020
Date of orders: 18 June 2020
Decision date: 18 June 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Neilson DCJ
Decision:
Head sentence 7 years, NPP 4 years.

Catchwords:
Crime – Sentence – 4 Principal Offences – (1) Supply large commercial quantity of cocaine (2.1519kgs); (2) Supply commercial quantity of 3,4 MDMA (205.34g); (3) Possess Smith & Wesson .38 calibre revolver; (4) Possess 12 gauge, double-barrelled shotgun – Plus 3 matters on Forms 1 – To seek to discharge a large drug debt and to get money to buy further drugs to which he was addicted, O agreed to “warehouse” large quantities of drugs and firearms in a home unit occupied by him and a close friend – In an armed home invasion, O was shot in the arm and his friend was murdered – Police found drugs, paraphernalia and firearms and weapons in the home unit and in a rooftop common area where O tried to hide most of the drugs after the home invasion, prior to arrival of emergency services – O is a refugee from Iraq who had spent 10 years in Jordan where he was discriminated against and bullied because of his religion and a speech impediment – Good prospects of rehabilitation – Aggregate sentence.

Legislation Cited:
Firearms Act 1996

Cases Cited:
R v Finigan [2019] NSWDC 590

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina – Crown
Offender – Sargon Odisho
Representation: Counsel:
Crown – D. Mansour
Offender – I. Lloyd QC
Solicitors:
Crown – DPP
Offender – Criminal Defence Group Lawyers

File Number(s): 2019/00176711
Publication restriction: Nil.

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: Sargon Odisho stands for sentence as a consequence of having pleaded guilty to four substantive charges. He also asks me to take into account on three different Forms 1 three further offences. The Forms 1 have not yet been signed by the offender however I am assured that he consents to my taking those into account and an undertaking has been obtained by his solicitor to obtain his signature thereon within a reasonable time.

The offences

The first offence to which the offender pleaded guilty is the supply of a large commercial quantity of the prohibited drug cocaine. The amount of the drug in question is 2.1519 kilograms. The large commercial quantity is one kilogram. Accordingly, the offender has admitted his guilt to the supply of more than twice the large commercial quantity of cocaine. The maximum penalty of that offence is life imprisonment. Parliament has fixed a standard non-parole period of 15 years which would need to be applied if the offender pleaded not guilty, was found guilty, and the Court assessed that the case was in the midrange of objective seriousness. In connection with that offence Mr Odisho asks me to take into account one matter on a Form 1. That offence is dealing with property, the proceeds of crime. The property is in fact cash amounting to $16,500.

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 Odisho

Details

AGLC: R v Odisho [2020] NSWDC 922
Case: [2020] NSWDC 922
Decision Date: 18 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Odisho involved the defendant, who was charged with four principal offences: supplying a large commercial quantity of cocaine (2.1519kg), supplying a commercial quantity of 3,4 MDMA (205.34g), possessing a Smith & Wesson.38 calibre revolver, and possessing a 12 gauge, double-barrelled shotgun. The defendant, a refugee from Iraq, had been living in Australia and had become addicted to drugs. In an effort to discharge a large drug debt and obtain money to buy further drugs, he agreed to store large quantities of drugs and firearms in a home unit he occupied with a close friend. During an armed home invasion, the defendant was shot in the arm and his friend was murdered. The police discovered drugs, paraphernalia, and firearms in the home unit and a rooftop common area where the defendant had attempted to hide most of the drugs prior to the arrival of emergency services.

The legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing principles to apply and the appropriate aggregate sentence for the defendant's four principal offences. The court had to consider the nature and circumstances of the offences, the defendant's background and prospects of rehabilitation, and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court also had to consider the impact of the defendant's addiction on his offending behaviour and his efforts to obtain treatment.

The court found that the defendant's offending behaviour was driven by his addiction and his need to obtain money to support his habit. The court noted that the defendant had good prospects of rehabilitation and had taken steps to address his addiction. The court also found that the defendant's offending behaviour was serious and required a significant sentence to achieve general and specific deterrence. However, the court took into account the defendant's background and the impact of his addiction on his offending behaviour. The court ultimately determined that an aggregate sentence of seven years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of four years, was appropriate.

The court ordered that the defendant be sentenced to seven years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of four years. The court also ordered that the defendant be placed on a supervision order for a period of five years following his release from prison. The court further ordered that the defendant be required to participate in a drug treatment program during his period of imprisonment and following his release.

Orders

Orders of the court

Head sentence 7 years, NPP 4 years.

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 Odisho [2020] NSWDC 922
Hearing dates:	18 June 2020
Date of orders:	18 June 2020
Decision date:	18 June 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Neilson DCJ
Decision:	Head sentence 7 years, NPP 4 years.
Catchwords:	Crime – Sentence – 4 Principal Offences – (1) Supply large commercial quantity of cocaine (2.1519kgs); (2) Supply commercial quantity of 3,4 MDMA (205.34g); (3) Possess Smith & Wesson .38 calibre revolver; (4) Possess 12 gauge, double-barrelled shotgun – Plus 3 matters on Forms 1 – To seek to discharge a large drug debt and to get money to buy further drugs to which he was addicted, O agreed to “warehouse” large quantities of drugs and firearms in a home unit occupied by him and a close friend – In an armed home invasion, O was shot in the arm and his friend was murdered – Police found drugs, paraphernalia and firearms and weapons in the home unit and in a rooftop common area where O tried to hide most of the drugs after the home invasion, prior to arrival of emergency services – O is a refugee from Iraq who had spent 10 years in Jordan where he was discriminated against and bullied because of his religion and a speech impediment – Good prospects of rehabilitation – Aggregate sentence.
Legislation Cited:	Firearms Act 1996
Cases Cited:	R v Finigan [2019] NSWDC 590
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina – Crown Offender – Sargon Odisho
Representation:	Counsel: Crown – D. Mansour Offender – I. Lloyd QC Solicitors: Crown – DPP Offender – Criminal Defence Group Lawyers
File Number(s):	2019/00176711
Publication restriction:	Nil.