R v Qaumi - [2022] NSWDC 302

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Qaumi [2022] NSWDC 302
Hearing dates: 1 June 2022
Date of orders: 1 June 2022
Decision date: 01 June 2022
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:
A term of imprisonment of 19 months with a non-parole period of 12 months: at [31] – [35].

Catchwords:
CRIME — Violent offences — Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Use of weapon — Record of previous convictions
SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Availability of summary disposal — Circumstances of offence — Deterrence— Objective seriousness — Purposes of sentencing

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Cases Cited:
Cahyadi v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 1
Qaumi, Farhad v R; Qaumi, Mumtaz v R; Qaumi, Jamil v R [2020] NSWCCA 163
R v Cattell [2019] NSWCCA 297
R v FarhadQaumi, Mumtaz Qaumi & Jamil Qaumi(Sentence) [2017] NSWSC 774
R v Jeremiah [2016] NSWCCA 241
R v MAK; R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 38

Category: Sentence
Parties:
Regina (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)
Farhad Qaumi (Offender)
Representation:
Ms N Johnson (Office of the Director of Public Prosections)
Mr D Price (Counsel for the Offender)

File Number(s): 2020/166766

Judgment

Farhad Qaumi, now aged 39, appears for sentence having pleaded guilty to one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to s 59 of the Crimes Act1900. The offence carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment with no standard non-parole period.
The matter was listed for trial on 11 October 2021. A plea of guilty was indicated a few days before the trial date. The plea, in those circumstances and pursuant to s 25D(2)(c) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, attracts a 5% discount for the utilitarian value of the plea on any sentence to be imposed.
Mr Price counsel for the offender, concedes that a term of full-time custody is appropriate in the circumstances.
The purposes of sentencing outlined in s 3A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, have to be taken into account.
Mr Qaumi is presently serving a term of imprisonment imposed by Hamill J (R v Farhad Qaumi, Mumtaz Qaumi & Jamil Qaumi (Sentence) [2017] NSWSC 774) and modified by the Court of Criminal Appeal (Qaumi, Farhad v R; Qaumi, Mumtaz v R; Qaumi, Jamil v R [2020] NSWCCA 163). The total term of imprisonment is 58 years with a non-parole period of 42 years and his current date of eligibility to apply for release to parole is 8 January 2056.
The agreed facts show that at the time of the offence, the offender and the victim Mr Sultani, then aged 31, were inmates in the high-risk management unit at Goulburn Correctional Centre. Both were housed in cell block B1 in adjoining cells. They were granted association privileges by prison staff which means they were allowed to spend time together in…

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 Qaumi

Details

AGLC: R v Qaumi [2022] NSWDC 302
Case: [2022] NSWDC 302
Decision Date: 01 June 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Qaumi involved the defendant who was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The matter was heard and determined in the relevant Australian court. The defendant admitted to assaulting the victim, causing actual bodily harm, and pleaded guilty to the charge. The central issues before the court were the determination of the appropriate sentence, considering both aggravating and mitigating factors.

The court considered several factors in determining the sentence. Among the aggravating factors, the use of a weapon during the assault and the defendant's prior criminal record were highlighted. Conversely, the court recognised the defendant's plea of guilty as a mitigating factor, which generally warrants a reduced sentence. The court also took into account the availability of summary disposal, the circumstances of the offence, the objective seriousness of the crime, and the purposes of sentencing, including deterrence and rehabilitation.

After weighing these factors, the court determined that the appropriate sentence was a term of imprisonment of 19 months, with a non-parole period of 12 months. The sentencing decision reflected a balanced consideration of both the aggravating and mitigating factors, aiming to achieve justice for the victim while also considering the broader objectives of the sentencing framework.

The final orders of the court mandated that the defendant serve a term of imprisonment of 19 months, with a non-parole period of 12 months. This decision was based on a comprehensive assessment of all relevant factors, ensuring that the sentence was both proportionate and aligned with the principles of justice.

Orders

Orders of the court

A term of imprisonment of 19 months with a non-parole period of 12 months: at [31] – [35].

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 Qaumi [2022] NSWDC 302
Hearing dates:	1 June 2022
Date of orders:	1 June 2022
Decision date:	01 June 2022
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	M L Williams SC DCJ
Decision:	A term of imprisonment of 19 months with a non-parole period of 12 months: at [31] – [35].
Catchwords:	CRIME — Violent offences — Assault occasioning actual bodily harm SENTENCING — Aggravating factors — Use of weapon — Record of previous convictions SENTENCING — Mitigating factors — Plea of guilty SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Availability of summary disposal — Circumstances of offence — Deterrence— Objective seriousness — Purposes of sentencing
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Cases Cited:	Cahyadi v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 1 Qaumi, Farhad v R; Qaumi, Mumtaz v R; Qaumi, Jamil v R [2020] NSWCCA 163 R v Cattell [2019] NSWCCA 297 R v FarhadQaumi, Mumtaz Qaumi & Jamil Qaumi(Sentence) [2017] NSWSC 774 R v Jeremiah [2016] NSWCCA 241 R v MAK; R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 38
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions) Farhad Qaumi (Offender)
Representation:	Ms N Johnson (Office of the Director of Public Prosections) Mr D Price (Counsel for the Offender)
File Number(s):	2020/166766