AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
1
District Court 17 February 2023

R v Abbas

[2023] NSWDC 281

DrugsFraud & dishonestyFirearms & weapons

Citation: R v Abbas [2023] NSWDC 281
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 17 February 2023
Judge: M L Williams SC DCJ

Background

The offender had a prior criminal history of serious violence, having been sentenced in 2013 to 11 years imprisonment (with an eight-year non-parole period) for manslaughter and related offences. He was released to parole in August 2019 but returned to custody in August 2021, just over two years later, in connection with offences committed in the months leading up to September 2021.

Police had established a strike force in May 2020 to investigate drug supply activities in the Illawarra region. The investigation identified the offender as a supplier of methylamphetamine and heroin, operating from his home in Brighton-Le-Sands using three mobile phones and coded language. Surveillance devices inside his home captured key evidence, including him handling large amounts of cash and, on a separate occasion in September 2021, opening packages containing gel blaster firearms that closely resembled real weapons.

The offender pleaded guilty to eight charges spanning drug supply (methylamphetamine, heroin and cocaine), possession of two unauthorised gel blaster firearms, and two counts of dealing with property suspected of being proceeds of crime. The parties agreed that a full-time custodial sentence was appropriate, with the term commencing 14 February 2022.

  • What aggregate sentence and non-parole period were appropriate across eight offences involving drug supply, firearms possession, and money laundering?
  • What weight should be given to the 25% guilty plea discount and subjective factors, including drug addiction and remorse?
  • Whether the offender's breach of conditional liberty (parole) operated as an aggravating factor.
  • Whether special circumstances existed to justify a non-parole period shorter than the statutory default (that is, less than three-quarters of the head sentence).
  • How the co-offender sentencing material should be treated, in circumstances where neither party argued parity.

Decision

Williams SC DCJ applied a 25% discount to reflect the guilty pleas. The court assessed the principal offending, supply of a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine (496 grams), as the most serious matter, attracting an indicative sentence of three years with a two-year non-parole period. The remaining drug supply, firearms and proceeds of crime offences attracted shorter indicative terms ranging from three months to 13 months.

The court treated the offender's breach of parole as an aggravating factor and noted his prior record, including the earlier manslaughter conviction. Drug addiction was acknowledged as relevant context but was not treated as mitigation. The court found that the offending was clearly financially motivated and reflected deliberate, organised conduct rather than behaviour driven solely by addiction.

On rehabilitation prospects, the court expressed cautious optimism, noting that the offender was now 30 years old with three children and family support, but described his rehabilitation prospects as "guarded" given his history. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on custodial conditions were also taken into account.

Special circumstances were found to exist, given the need for an extended period of intensive post-release supervision and the accumulation of sentences in the aggregate. This justified departing from the standard non-parole period ratio, resulting in a non-parole period of two years and six months against an aggregate head sentence of four years and three months.

Orders Made

  • The offender was convicted of each offence.
  • Indicative sentences (after 25% discount) were imposed as follows:
  • Sequence 1 (unauthorised pistol): 3 months
  • Sequence 2 (unauthorised assault rifle, including Form 1 ammunition matter): 4 months
  • Sequence 7 (supply commercial quantity methylamphetamine, 496g): 3 years, non-parole period 2 years
  • Sequence 8 (supply heroin, 41g): 9 months
  • Sequence 11 (supply cocaine, 26g): 6 months
  • Sequence 17 (supply cocaine, 224g): 12 months
  • Sequence 27 (dealing with suspected proceeds of crime, $22,500): 11 months
  • Sequence 28 (dealing with suspected proceeds of crime, $100,000): 13 months
  • Aggregate sentence of 4 years and 3 months, commencing 14 February 2022.
  • Non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months, expiring 13 August 2024.
  • Special circumstances found.
  • Confiscation orders made by consent.

Key Takeaways

  • Breach of parole operated as an aggravating factor in the sentencing exercise, compounding the seriousness of the fresh offending.
  • Drug addiction, while relevant context, does not operate as mitigation where the offending is clearly financially motivated and demonstrates organised, deliberate conduct.
  • Special circumstances justified a non-parole period below the standard ratio where the accumulation of sentences in an aggregate and the need for intensive post-release supervision both pointed in that direction.
  • The District Court treated co-offender sentencing material as background context only, rather than as the basis for any parity argument, where neither party pressed for parity.
  • Under the approach endorsed in Attorney General's Application No 1 of 2002, Form 1 matters are taken into account in fixing the sentence for the principal offence to which they are attached, rather than attracting separate penalties.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 193C(1) and (2)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 3A
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 25(1) and (2)
- Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), s 7(1), s 65(3)

Cases:
- Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 14
- DH v R [2022] NSWCCA 200
- R v Abbas [2013] NSWSC 1379