Salameh v R [2024] NSWCCA 239

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Salameh v R [2024] NSWCCA 239 Hearing dates: 6 September 2024; 22 November 2024 Date of orders: 20 December 2024 Decision date: 20 December 2024 Before: Bell CJ, Payne JA and Sweeney J at [1]; Basten AJA at [48]; Dhanji J at [152] Decision: (1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal from his convictions for taking part in the supply of a large commercial quantity and of a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug. (2) Dismiss the appeal. (3) Refuse the applicant leave to appeal against sentence. Catchwords: STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 25 – supply of a large commercial quantity of a prohibited drug – level of knowledge required to establish charge under s 25(2) CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against conviction – where applicant convicted of supply of a large commercial quantity of a prohibited drug – applicant convicted of supply of fentanyl – where applicant gave evidence of mistaken belief as to the particular prohibited drug in his possession – whether applicant had requisite mental knowledge with regard to quantity of prohibited drug CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – supply of a prohibited drug – whether sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness of offending – where sentence appeal was previously abandoned and subsequently raised without leave Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 41 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 7 Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 307.1, 307.2 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 33 Customs Act 1901 (Cth), ss 233B, 235 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 3, Pt 2, Div 2, ss 23, 24, 25, 29, 33, 41, Sch 1 Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6 Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal) Rules 2021 (NSW), r 3.6 Cases Cited: Alhassan v R [2017] NSWCCA 73 Bahri Kural v The Queen (1987) 162 CLR 502 Can v R [2023] NSWCCA 179 Cheng v The Queen (2000) 203 CLR 248; [2000] HCA 53 Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67 Dunn v The Queen (1986) 32 A Crim R 203 Finch v R (2016) 259 A Crim R 407; [2016] NSWCCA 133 Hamzeh v R [2022] NSWCCA 232 He Kaw Teh v The Queen (1985) 157 CLR 523; [1985] HCA 43 Kingswell v The Queen (1985) 159 CLR 264; [1985] HCA 72 Moriarty v Nye [2024] NSWCCA 116 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Nguyen v R [2015] NSWCCA 78 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority 194 CLR 355; [1998] HCA 28 R v Busby [2018] NSWCCA 136 R v CWW (1993) 32 NSWLR 348 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Lau (1998) 105 A Crim R 167 R v Micalizzi [2004] NSWCCA 406 R v Qutami (2001) 127 A Crim R 369; [2001] NSWCCA 353 R v Shi [2004] NSWCCA 135 R v Turnbull (1943) 44 SR (NSW) 108 Sgarlata v Western Australia (2015) 49 WAR 176; [2015] WASCA 215 Siafakas v R [2016] NSWCCA 100 SZTAL v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection (2017) 262 CLR 362; [2017] HCA 34 Tabe v The Queen (2005) 225 CLR 418; [2005] HCA 59 Taylor v The Owners – Strata Plan No 11564 (2014) 253 CLR 531; [2014] HCA 9 The King v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Limited (2023) 97 ALJR 595; [2023] HCA 23 The King v Rohan (a pseudonym) (2024) 98 ALJR 429; [2024] HCA 3 The Queen v Meaton (1986) 160 CLR 359; [1986] HCA 27 Yousef Jidah v R (2014) 246 A Crim R 368; [2014] NSWCCA 270 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Shadi Salameh (Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T F Woods (Applicant) S Dowling SC / S Lind (Respondent)