Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Sorrenson

In the matter of Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Sorrenson, the respondent, Shane Lachlan Sorrenson, was subject to a supervision order made on 16 August 2019 under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003. The respondent was convicted of consuming cannabis, which was a contravention of his supervision order. The Attorney-General sought orders under section 22 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003, arguing that the adequate protection of the community could not be ensured by the existing supervision order. The court was required to decide whether the respondent could be returned to the community under the supervision order despite the contravention.

The court considered psychiatric evidence provided by Dr Sundin, Dr Brown, and Dr Andrews. Dr Sundin opined that the respondent’s risk for future sexual recidivism was moderate and had been reduced to moderate to low with the imposition of the supervision order. Dr Brown concluded that the respondent’s risk of committing a serious sexual offence if released was reduced to a moderate and manageable level by the supervision order. Dr Andrews reported that the respondent was progressing well in therapy sessions and was keen to abide by his order. The court found that the adequate protection of the community could be ensured by the existing supervision order.

The court ordered that the respondent be released from custody on 17 November 2020 and continue to be subject to the supervision order made by Justice Davis on 16 August 2019. The court found that the evidence demonstrated that the respondent could be returned to the community under the supervision order despite the contravention. The court also noted that the respondent had not breached the supervision order by using intoxicants and that he had engaged in vocational study and was looking to re-engage with employment.