AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 15 September 2025

R v Shehade

[2025] NSWDC 366

Theft & propertyFirearms & weapons

Citation: R v Shehade [2025] NSWDC 366
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 15 September 2025
Judge: Scotting DCJ

Background

The offender, an 18-year-old at the time of the offences, posed as a car seller on Facebook Marketplace to lure prospective buyers to locations in Sydney's southwest at night. On 14 October 2023, he approached two victims at a staged meeting point in Yagoona, grabbed one by the shirt, held a knife to his body, and threatened to kill him unless they handed over cash, a watch, and mobile phones. A week later, on 21 October 2023, he used the same method to rob a third victim at knifepoint, this time taking $10,000 in cash from the victim's unattended vehicle.

The offender was arrested on 28 October 2023 and held on remand for 39 days before being granted Supreme Court bail in December 2023. He appeared for sentence in the District Court after pleading guilty in the Local Court to two counts of robbery armed with an offensive weapon under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, with a third count of the same charge taken into account on a Form 1 (a document listing related offences considered at sentencing without recording a separate conviction).

The maximum penalty for each offence is 20 years imprisonment.

  • What weight should be given to mitigating factors including youth, remorse, guilty pleas, prospects of rehabilitation, and mental health?
  • Whether special circumstances existed to justify a longer parole period relative to the non-parole period
  • What aggregate sentence was appropriate across the two counts, accounting for the Form 1 matter and a 25% guilty plea discount

Decision

Scotting DCJ identified no aggravating factors beyond those already inherent in the offence. On mitigating factors, his Honour accepted that the offender had no significant prior criminal history, had expressed genuine remorse to multiple parties including the court, and had good prospects of rehabilitation given his age and family support. The offender's drug and gambling addictions, his unmedicated ADHD diagnosis, and his association with a negative peer group at the time of the offences were treated as relevant context, though the court observed that his commitment to rehabilitation had been inconsistent.

The court was satisfied that no sentence other than imprisonment was appropriate. It imposed an aggregate sentence under s 53A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, reflecting the totality of the offending across both counts and the Form 1 matter. Before aggregation, the individual sentences (post-discount) were assessed at 4 years and 6 months for the first count (including the Form 1 matter) and 3 years and 6 months for the third count.

A finding of special circumstances was made, warranting a departure from the standard ratio between non-parole period and head sentence. The court pointed to the offender's youth, his good rehabilitation prospects, and his mental health issues as grounds for an extended parole period to support his transition back into the community. The sentence was backdated to 7 August 2025 to account for the 39 days of presentence custody.

Orders Made

  • The offender was convicted on both counts of robbery armed with an offensive weapon
  • An aggregate term of imprisonment of 5 years was imposed
  • Non-parole period: 3 years, commencing 7 August 2025 and expiring 6 August 2028
  • Head sentence expires 6 August 2030
  • The offender is eligible for release on parole on 6 August 2028

Key Takeaways

  • The District Court treated the offender's youth (18 at the time of offending) as a significant factor in assessing rehabilitation prospects and in finding special circumstances to extend the parole period.
  • A 25% discount on sentence applied as a result of guilty pleas entered in the Local Court, pursuant to s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.
  • Where an offender's first period of custody coincides with mental health issues and young age, courts may find special circumstances justifying a non-parole period that is a smaller proportion of the head sentence than the statutory norm.
  • Consistent, repeated offending using a deliberate and premeditated method (staged online vehicle listings) did not attract separate aggravating factors beyond those inherent in the charge of armed robbery, as no additional statutory aggravating factors under s 21A were identified by the court.
  • Under the standard sentencing fact-finding approach confirmed in R v Olbrich, findings adverse to the offender were made beyond reasonable doubt, while findings in the offender's favour were made on the balance of probabilities.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 97(1)
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 21A, 25D(2)(a), 53A

Cases
- Attorney General's Application No 1 of 2022 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147
- Legge v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 244
- R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
- R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270
- R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353