12 Questions
What was Ahmad Ahmad's charge in the case of Ahmad v R NSWCCA 294?
Attempting to import a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug
What was the pure weight of the MDMA the appellant attempted to import?
594.43 kilograms
What was the maximum penalty for the offence the appellant was charged with?
Imprisonment for life
When did the appellant's non-parole period commence?
8 August 2017
What were the three grounds of appeal sought by the appellant?
Hardship to the appellant's family, manifestly excessive sentence, sense of grievance towards co-offender's sentence
What court sentenced Ahmad Ahmad in this case?
District Court
When resentencing a federal offender, what does the Court need to consider regarding the probable effect of a sentence on a family member or dependent?
Neither a nor b
If legal error has been established in a sentencing decision and the Court of Criminal Appeal is to reassess the sentence, what is explicitly stated as unnecessary?
Considering the manifest excessiveness of the sentence
In what circumstance does the Court only consider a question of parity when reviewing a sentence?
When the sentence falls within the proper discretionary range
Which judge agreed to resentencing the appellant based on the erroneous omission of relevant family hardship factors?
All of the above
In what section does it state that when passing sentence for a federal offense, a court must consider the probable effect on the offender's family?
Section 16A(2)
What should be imposed by a court when sentencing a federal offender according to the text?
A severity appropriate in all circumstances of the offense
Study Notes
Ahmad v R NSWCCA 294
- Ahmad Ahmad was charged with attempting to import a commercial quantity of MDMA
- The pure weight of the MDMA the appellant attempted to import was 10.5 kilograms
- The maximum penalty for the offence the appellant was charged with was life imprisonment
- The appellant's non-parole period commenced on October 22, 2015
Grounds of Appeal
- The three grounds of appeal sought by the appellant were:
- The sentencing judge erred in failing to consider the probable effect of the sentence on the appellant's family
- The sentencing judge erred in failing to consider the appellant's good character
- The sentencing judge erred in sentencing the appellant to a period of imprisonment that was disproportionate to the offences committed
Resentencing
- When resentencing a federal offender, the Court needs to consider the probable effect of a sentence on a family member or dependent
- If legal error has been established in a sentencing decision and the Court of Criminal Appeal is to reassess the sentence, it is explicitly stated that reconsideration of the whole sentence is unnecessary
- The Court only considers a question of parity when reviewing a sentence in circumstances where the sentence is disproportionate to the sentences imposed on co-offenders
Court and Judges
- The Court that sentenced Ahmad Ahmad in this case was the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
- Judge Bellew agreed to resentencing the appellant based on the erroneous omission of relevant family hardship factors
Federal Offenses
- Section 16A(2) of the Crimes Act 1914 states that when passing sentence for a federal offence, a court must consider the probable effect on the offender's family
- According to the text, a court should impose a sentence that is just and appropriate in all the circumstances when sentencing a federal offender
Test your knowledge on the legal case of Ahmad Ahmad's appeal to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in 2023 regarding drug importation charges. Explore the details of the case, including the legal sections involved and the final judgment.
Make Your Own Quizzes and Flashcards
Convert your notes into interactive study material.
Get started for free
