NSW Caselaw
District Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Sabbouh [2022] NSWDC 281 Hearing dates: 17 May 2022 Date of orders: 19 May 2022 Decision date: 19 May 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Bennett SC DCJ Decision: Aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years 4 months to be served by way of intensive correction in the community Catchwords: CRIME — Firearms offences — Unauthorised use/possession of firearm SENTENCING — Penalties — Intensive correction orders Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Firearms Act 1996 Cases Cited: Bonett v R [2013] NSWCCA 234 Imbornone v R [2017] NSWCCA 144 Veen v The Queen [1988] HCA 14 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Munda v State of Western Australia [2013] HCA 38 R v Cartwright (1989) 17 NSWLR 243 R v Quinlin [2021] NSWCCA 284 R v Qutami [2001] NSWCCA 353 R v Serratore [2000] NSWSC 696 R v Ward [2004] NSWSC 420 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Nashat Sabbouh (offender) Representation: Tara Reddy (Solicitor for the ODPP) Michael Coroneos (Counsel for the offender)
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown) File Number(s): 2020/00233197
REVISED EX TEMPORE JudgEment
INTRODUCTION 1. Nadim Sabbouh and Nashat Sabbouh are brothers. Both appeared for sentenced proceedings upon charges arising from events on 9 August 2020 when Nadim Sabbouh discharged multiple shots from a firearm on a suburban street near to the home occupied by Nashat Sabbouh. 2. The matter commenced before me on Tuesday 17 May 2022 and thereafter the proceedings against Nashat Sabbouh were adjourned for judgement and sentence today, 19 May 2022. Those against Nadim Sabbouh were adjourned to 21 June 2022 for further hearing. 3. The offence with which Nadim Sabbouh is charged are: Sequence 3 On 9 August 2020 at Chester Hill in the State of New South Wales [he] did acquire a firearm in contravention of a Firearms Prohibition Order that was in force. S 74(1) Firearms Act 1996 Sequence 4 On 9 August 2020 at Chester Hill in the State of New South Wales [he] did fire a firearm with disregard for the safety of Gary Minchenko. S 93G(1)(c) Crimes Act 1900 1. These will be the subject of further evidence on the next occasion. I have included the details of these charges to highlight the disparity between the predicament faced by Nadim Sabbouh in contrast to that of his brother Nashat. The parties concede that the differences in the cases are such that parity is not a matter of significant concern.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate