REGINA v MANKARYOUS; REGINA v MANKARYOUS [2011] NSWCCA 158

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: REGINA v MANKARYOUS; REGINA v MANKARYOUS [2011] NSWCCA 158 Hearing dates: Tuesday 28 June 2011 Decision date: 20 July 2011 Before: Allsop P at [1] Hidden J at [2] Hall J at [3] Decision: The orders are:- Michael Mankaryous:- (1) Crown appeal upheld. (2) The sentences imposed in respect of Counts 1 and 2 be quashed. (3) In respect of Count 1, the respondent, Michael Mankaryous be sentenced to a term of imprisonment involving a non-parole period of 2 years and 5 months to commence on 9 March 2009 and to expire on 8 August 2011 with a balance of term of 3 years and 7 months to expire on 8 March 2015. (4) In respect of Count 2, the respondent, Michael Mankaryous be sentenced to a term of imprisonment involving a non-parole period of 2 years and 5 months to commence on 9 March 2009 and to expire on 8 August 2011 with a balance of term of 3 years and 7 months to expire on 8 March 2015. Medhat Mankaryous:- (1) Crown appeal upheld. (2) The sentences imposed in respect of Counts 1 and 2 be quashed. (3) In respect of Count 1, the respondent Medhat Mankaryous be sentenced to a term of imprisonment involving a non-parole period of 1 year and 5 months to commence on 8 February 2011 and to expire on 7 July 2012 with a balance of term of 3 years and 7 months to expire on 7 February 2016. (4) In respect of Count 2, the respondent Medhat Mankaryous be sentenced to a term of imprisonment involving a non-parole period of 1 year and 5 months to commence on 8 February 2011 and to expire on 7 July 2012 with a balance of term of 3 years and 7 months to expire on 7 February 2016. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - Crown appeal on sentence - whether sentences manifestly inadequate - whether trial judge's finding of offending "substantially below mid-range" in error - whether degree of departure from standard non-parole period in error - offenders to be releases shortly - whether deterrence and retribution give way to rehabilitation - appeal allowed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Appeal & Review) Act 2001 Crimes (Appeal & Review) Amendment Double Jeopardy Act 2009 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Cases Cited: Dinsdale v R [2000] HCA 54 Duffy & Mangan v R [2009] NSWCCA 304 Licastro v R [2008] NSWCCA 131 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 R v Cahayadi [2007] NSWCCA 1 R v Davies [2004] NSWCCA 319 R v Dodd (1991) 57 A Crim R 349 R v Dole & Nguyen [2010] NSWCCA 101 R v Edwards (1996) 90 A Crim R 510 R v Hamieh [2010] NSWCCA 189 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 R v JW [2010] NSWCCA 49 R v Knight & Biuvanua [2007] NSWCCA 283 R v Kyroglou [1999] NSWCCA 106 R v Maisey [2005 NSWCCA 347 R v McEvoy [2010] NSWCCA 110 R v PB [2008] NSWCCA 109 R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 115 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Medhat MANKARYOUS v REGINA Michael MANKARYOUS v REGINA Representation: Crown: D Arnott SC Respondents: A Francis Crown: S Kavanagh Respondents: S O'Connor File Number(s): 2009/142600 2009/157764 Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 9101 Date of Decision: 2011-02-10 00:00:00 Before: Coorey DCJ File Number(s): 2009/142600 2009/157764