Attorney-General (Qld) v S - [2017] QSC 32

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Attorney-General (Qld) v S [2017] QSC 32

PARTIES:

ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND

(applicant)

v

S

(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BS2012 of 2015

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application

DELIVERED ON:

13 March 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

6 February 2017

JUDGE:

Brown J

ORDER:

The decision that the respondent is a serious danger to the community in the absence of an order pursuant to Division 3, Part 2 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) be affirmed and orders that:

1. The respondent, S, continue to be subject to the Continuing Detention Order.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING ORDERS – ORDERS AND DECLARATIONS RELATING TO SERIOUS OR VIOLENT OFFENDERS OR DANGEROUS SEXUAL OFFENDERS – GENERALLY – where the respondent was detained under a continuing detention order under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where the applicant applied for the order to be reaffirmed under section 30 of the Act – where psychiatrists opined that the respondent was a moderate to high risk of reoffending sexually if released under a supervision order –where the respondent had participated in a sexual offenders program but denied his sexual offending – where psychiatrists considered he was still in need of participating in sexual offending and violence programs and considered whether the respondent poses a serious danger to the community pursuant to Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – whether the applicant has discharged the onus to establish that the respondent should continue to be subject to a continuing detention order – whether the community could be adequately protected by a supervision order

Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003, s 13(2), s 13(5)(a), s 27, s 29(1), s 30

Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Francis [2006] QCA 324, cited
Attorney-General (Qld) v Kennedy[2016] QSC 287, cited
Attorney-General (Qld) v S [2015] QSC 157
Fardonv Attorney-General (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575, cited

R v S [2002] QCA 38, cited

COUNSEL:

J B Rolls for the applicant

The respondent appeared on his own behalf

SOLICITORS:

Crown Law for the applicant

The respondent appeared on his own behalf

BROWN J: This is an application pursuant to s 27 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (“the Act”) for a review of the continuing detention of the respondent. The applicant seeks to have the decision made on 9 June 2015 that the respondent presents a serious danger to the community in the absence of a Division 3 order under the Act affirmed, and that a continuing detention order, consequentially, be made pursuant to s 30(3)(a) of the Act.

On 9 June 2015, Philip McMurdo J (as his Honour then was) having been satisfied that the respondent was a serious danger to the community in the absence of a Division 3 Order under the Act made a Continuing Detention Order finding that there could be adequate protection of the community only by a continuing detention order.

The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Attorney-General (Qld) v S

Details

AGLC: Attorney-General (Qld) v S [2017] QSC 32
Case: [2017] QSC 32
Decision Date: 13 March 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the Attorney-General of Queensland (Applicant) and S (Respondent), with the dispute concerning the respondent's continued detention under a continuing detention order imposed under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld). The application was brought to reaffirm the order under section 30 of the Act. The court was tasked with determining whether the applicant had met the onus of establishing that the respondent should continue to be detained due to the risk of reoffending sexually and whether the community could be adequately safeguarded by a supervision order.

The legal issues at the heart of this case were whether the applicant had successfully discharged the burden of proving that the respondent, S, remained a serious danger to the community and thus should be subject to a continuing detention order, as opposed to a supervision order. This involved assessing the risk of reoffending based on expert psychiatric evaluations and the respondent's participation in, and denial of, a sexual offenders program. The court also needed to consider whether the community's safety could be sufficiently ensured by a supervision order.

The court, after considering the psychiatric evidence, concluded that the risk of the respondent reoffending sexually if released under a supervision order was moderate to high. Despite the respondent's participation in a sexual offenders program, the experts considered him still in need of further participation in sexual offending and violence programs. The court was persuaded that the respondent posed a serious danger to the community, thereby upholding the decision to continue the detention order. Consequently, the court affirmed the decision that the respondent is a serious danger to the community and ordered that the respondent, S, continue to be subject to the Continuing Detention Order.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision that the respondent is a serious danger to the community in the absence of an order pursuant to Division 3, Part 2 of the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) be affirmed and orders that:

1. The respondent, S, continue to be subject to the Continuing Detention Order.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Attorney-General (Qld) v S [2017] QSC 32
PARTIES:	ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF QUEENSLAND (applicant) v S (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	BS2012 of 2015
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Application
DELIVERED ON:	13 March 2017
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	6 February 2017
JUDGE:	Brown J
ORDER:	The decision that the respondent is a serious danger to the community in the absence of an order pursuant to Division 3, Part 2 of the *Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act* 2003 (Qld) be affirmed and orders that: 1. The respondent, S, continue to be subject to the Continuing Detention Order.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING ORDERS – ORDERS AND DECLARATIONS RELATING TO SERIOUS OR VIOLENT OFFENDERS OR DANGEROUS SEXUAL OFFENDERS – GENERALLY – where the respondent was detained under a continuing detention order under the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – where the applicant applied for the order to be reaffirmed under section 30 of the Act – where psychiatrists opined that the respondent was a moderate to high risk of reoffending sexually if released under a supervision order –where the respondent had participated in a sexual offenders program but denied his sexual offending – where psychiatrists considered he was still in need of participating in sexual offending and violence programs and considered whether the respondent poses a serious danger to the community pursuant to Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003 (Qld) – whether the applicant has discharged the onus to establish that the respondent should continue to be subject to a continuing detention order – whether the community could be adequately protected by a supervision order Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003, s 13(2), s 13(5)(a), s 27, s 29(1), s 30 Attorney-General for the State of Queensland v Francis [2006] QCA 324, cited Attorney-General (Qld) v Kennedy[2016] QSC 287, cited Attorney-General (Qld) v S [2015] QSC 157 Fardonv Attorney-General (Qld) (2004) 223 CLR 575, cited R v S [2002] QCA 38, cited
COUNSEL:	J B Rolls for the applicant The respondent appeared on his own behalf
SOLICITORS:	Crown Law for the applicant The respondent appeared on his own behalf