NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Jaafar v R [2017] NSWCCA 223 Hearing dates: 15 May 2017 Date of orders: 20 September 2017 Decision date: 20 September 2017 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]; Price J at [3]; Lonergan J at [120] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted. (2) Appeal allowed. (3) The sentence imposed by Madgwick QC ADCJ is quashed. (4) The applicant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 17 years 6 months commencing on 6 December 2012 and expiring on 5 June 2030 with a non-parole period of 11 years, expiring on 5 December 2023. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of cocaine – whether judge erred in failing to adopt instinctive synthesis approach in sentencing applicant – concession of error by the Crown – re-sentence – consideration of the extent of the applicant's knowledge of the amount of the imported cocaine – consideration of parity of co-offender's sentences – whether justifiable sense of grievance – consideration of additional material on re-sentence – whether hardship to applicant's family exceptional – consideration of past and indicated future assistance to police – whether lesser sentence warranted Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 16A(1), 16A(2), 16A(2)(f), 16A(2)(g), 16A(2)(p), 16AC(1), 16AC(2) Criminal Code (Cth), ss 11.5(1), 307.1(1) Cases Cited: Elshani v R (2015) 255 A Crim R 488; [2015] NSWCCA 254 Garcia v R [2013] NSWCCA 241 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295; [1997] HCA 26 R v Ilbay [2000] NSWCCA 251 R v Kollas and Mitchell [2002] NSWCCA 491 R v Nguyen; R v Pham (2010) 205 A Crim R 106; [2010] NSWCCA 238 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 R v Zerafa (2013) 235 A Crim R 265; [2013] NSWCCA 222 Wong v The Queen; Leung v The Queen [2001] HCA 64; 207 CLR 584 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Mohammed Jamil Jaafar (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr T. Game SC, Mr P. Lange (Applicant) Ms S. McNaughton SC, Ms P. McEviery (Respondent)
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