Site Logo

Ahmad v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 198

appeal against sentence — attempting to possess a marketable quantity of a border controlled drug offence contrary to ss 11.1(1) and 307.6(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code and attempting to import a marketable quantity of a border controlled drug offence contrary to ss 11.1(1) and 307.2(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code — 2 state offences — federal offences relate to 74g of cocaine and 367g of cocaine respectively — original sentence imposed 7 years’ imprisonment with a 5 year non-parole period — manifest excess — manifest excess cannot be established by pointing to a statistical range of sentence and arguing that the particular sentence fell at or near the top of that range — says nothing about whether or not sentencing judge erred in determining sentence — parity — each offender faced charges the other did not and had different roles — offender held supervisory role in relation to overall scheme to import drugs in consignments mailed from the United States — while co-offender a “trusted lieutenant” to offender, co-offender did as was directed even to performing most menial of tasks — while both offenders had limited criminal histories, offender had been largely unemployed in adult life whereas co-offender lived “a relatively productive life with extensive employment history to his credit” — leave to appeal granted — appeal dismissed
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions