R v Omari

The appeal concerned the sentences imposed on the respondent, Bilal Badr-Eddeen Omari, by the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The Crown appealed against the sentences for two offences: jointly importing a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug (MDMA) contrary to the *Criminal Code Act 1995* (Cth), and trafficking in a controlled drug other than cannabis (cocaine) contrary to the *Criminal Code 2002* (ACT). The respondent had pleaded guilty to these offences.

The legal issues before the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory, Court of Appeal, were whether the sentences imposed were manifestly inadequate and whether the residual discretion to intervene should be exercised. The sentencing judge had imposed a term of imprisonment for the Territory offence and a concurrent term for the Commonwealth offence, with a recognizance release order. A key aspect of the Crown's complaint was that the respondent would not serve any period of full-time custody solely attributable to the Commonwealth offence due to the concurrency of the sentences.

The Court found that the sentence for the Commonwealth offence, which carried a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, was manifestly inadequate, particularly when considered alongside the details of the offending. The Court also concluded that the overall sentence was manifestly inadequate. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the respondent was to be re-sentenced.