R v Yalim - [2023] NSWDC 111

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Yalim [2023] NSWDC 111
Hearing dates: 03 February 2023
Date of orders: 24 February 2023
Decision date: 24 February 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:
Specify an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years

Catchwords:
CRIME — Firearms offences — Use/Possess prohibited pistol/firearm
CRIME — Drug offences — Supply prohibited drug
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Aggregate sentences
SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Form 1 offences

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985
Firearms Act 1996
Weapons Prohibition Act 1998

Cases Cited:
Attorney-General’s application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518
Callaghan v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 58
Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
RvBavadra (2000) 115 A Crim R 152
RvBrown [2006] NSWCCA 249
R v Williams [2005] NSWCCA 355
Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Ahmet Yalim (Offender)
Representation:
Hazel Pais (Solicitor for the Crown)
Stephen Alexander (Solicitor for the Offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Alexanders Lawyers (Offender)

File Number(s): 2022/00024806

Revised ex tempore JUDGeMENT

Introduction

Ahmet Yalim appears today for sentence in respect of three offences, to which he pleaded guilty in the Local Court, from whence he was committed to this Court for sentence. Before me, he adhered to his pleas of guilty and confirmed that additional offences included on Form 1 documents were to be taken into account if the Court was minded doing so. He admitted his guilt in respect of each of those additional offences and confirmed that that was his wish.

The Offences

The first offence upon which sentence is to be imposed is contrary to s 51D(2) Firearms Act 1996, alleging that he on 27 January at Penshurst in the State of New South Wales possessed more than three firearms, namely five firearms, that were not registered, of which five were prohibited firearms one of which was a pistol, in circumstances where the offender was not a person authorised by a license or permit to possess those firearms. The maximum penalty specified for that offence is imprisonment for 20 years. There is a standard non-parole period for the purposes of Part 4 Div. 1A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The period specified is imprisonment for 10 years.
The second offence, sequence 2, is contrary to s 7(1) Weapons Prohibition Act 1998. At the same place and at the same time, he was in possession of a crossbow without being authorised to do so by a permit. The maximum penalty for that offence is imprisonment for 14 years, with a standard non-parole period of five years.
The third offence, sequence 14, is an offence of supply prohibited drug contrary to s 25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act

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 Yalim

Details

AGLC: R v Yalim [2023] NSWDC 111
Case: [2023] NSWDC 111
Decision Date: 24 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Yalim involved the appellant, who was charged with various firearms and drug-related offences. The appellant was found in possession of a prohibited pistol, ammunition, and a prohibited drug, leading to the charges being brought against him. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, which was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for the appellant's multiple convictions. The central legal issues in this case were the correct approach to sentencing for multiple offences, particularly considering the nature and severity of each offence, and the appropriate aggregate sentence given the form 1 offences involved.

The court considered the appellant's criminal history, the seriousness of the offences, and the need for deterrence and denunciation. The Supreme Court of Victoria emphasised the importance of ensuring that the sentence reflects the cumulative impact of the appellant's criminal conduct. Given the multiple convictions, the court needed to balance the need for punishment with the principles of proportionality and justice. The court recognised that the offences were serious and warranted significant punishment, but also needed to consider the potential for rehabilitation.

The court ultimately determined that an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 4 years was appropriate, with a non-parole period of 2 years. This decision was made after carefully considering the severity of the offences, the appellant's criminal history, and the need for an effective deterrent. The court's reasoning was that the sentence needed to adequately reflect the seriousness of the multiple offences while also providing an opportunity for rehabilitation. The court's final orders specified the aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years, reflecting a balanced approach to sentencing in this complex case.

Orders

Orders of the court

Specify an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 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 Yalim [2023] NSWDC 111
Hearing dates:	03 February 2023
Date of orders:	24 February 2023
Decision date:	24 February 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bennett SC DCJ
Decision:	Specify an aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2 years
Catchwords:	CRIME — Firearms offences — Use/Possess prohibited pistol/firearm CRIME — Drug offences — Supply prohibited drug SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Multiple offences — Aggregate sentences SENTENCING — Relevant factors on sentence — Form 1 offences
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Firearms Act 1996 Weapons Prohibition Act 1998
Cases Cited:	Attorney-General’s application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 518 Callaghan v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 58 Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 RvBavadra (2000) 115 A Crim R 152 RvBrown [2006] NSWCCA 249 R v Williams [2005] NSWCCA 355 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex (Crown) Ahmet Yalim (Offender)
Representation:	Hazel Pais (Solicitor for the Crown) Stephen Alexander (Solicitor for the Offender) Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Alexanders Lawyers (Offender)
File Number(s):	2022/00024806