Hinchley v The King - [2023] NSWDC 18

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Hinchley v R [2023] NSWDC 18
Hearing dates: 31 January 2023
Date of orders: 08 February 2023
Decision date: 08 February 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Scotting DCJ
Decision:
(1) Appeal against conviction dismissed.
(2) I confirm the orders imposed by the Magistrate.

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeal and review — Appeal from Local Court to District Court — By person convicted against conviction - failure to comply with annual reporting obligation

Legislation Cited:
Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000
Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Regulation 2015 (NSW)
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001
Interpretation Act 1987

Cases Cited:
AGv Director of Public Prosecutions [2015] NSWCA 218
Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenuew (Northern Territory) (2009) 239 CLR 27
Certain Lloyd’s Underwriters v Cross (2012) 87 ALJR 131
Ex parteClubb v Westpac Banking Corporation (1990) 93 ALR 123
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503
Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118
GianoutsasvGlykis [2006] NSWCCA 137
Lumney v Director of Public Prosecutions [2021] NSWCA 186
McNab v Director of Public Prosecutions [2021] NSWCA 298
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355
Re Bolton; Ex Parte Beane (1987) 162 CLR 514
Taylor v Owners of Strata Plan 11564 (2014) 253 CLR 531
Unions NSW v New South Wales (2019) 264 CLR 595

Texts Cited:
Herzfeld and Prince, Interpretation, 2nd edition, Thomson Reuters, 2020, Sydney.

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Marcus Hinchley v Rex
Representation:
Counsel:
J Martin (Appellant)
Solicitors:
K Legal Services (Appellant)
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Rex)

File Number(s): 2021/161157
Publication restriction: None
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

Downing Centre

Jurisdiction:

Local Court

Date of Decision:

24 May 2022

Before:

Magistrate Crofts

JUDGMENT

Introduction

On 28 July 2022, Marcus Hinchley (the appellant) was found guilty of an offence of failing to comply with reporting obligations contrary to s 17(1) Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (the Act) by her Honour Magistrate Crofts in the Local Court. Specifically, the prosecution alleged that between 1 May 2021 and 31 May 2021 that the appellant failed to comply with the annual reporting obligation imposed by s 10 of the Act. The appellant brings an appeal as of right against the conviction.

Facts and Background

On 5 April 2018, the appellant was convicted of and sentenced for a number of registerable offences and thereafter became a registerable person within the meaning of s 3A of the Act. He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment and was released from custody on 4 May 2019.
On 9 May 2019 the appellant attended Balmain Police Station to make an initial report of his relevant personal information defined in s 9 of the Act.
Section 10(1) of the Act required the appellant to attend a police station in person to report his relevant personal information “each year” (annual report). The appellant was obliged to make his annual…

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 Hinchley v The King

Details

AGLC: Hinchley v The King [2023] NSWDC 18
Case: [2023] NSWDC 18
Decision Date: 08 February 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal originated from the Local Court of New South Wales, where the appellant, Hinchley, contested the conviction imposed upon him by a Magistrate. The nature of the dispute was Hinchley's failure to comply with an annual reporting obligation as a condition of his parole. The appellant took the matter to the District Court of New South Wales for an appeal against his conviction.

The legal issues before the court were centred on whether the appellant's failure to comply with the annual reporting obligation constituted an offence, and if the conviction by the Magistrate was justified. The court had to determine the interpretation of the parole conditions and the consequences of breaching such conditions. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the appeal process was correctly followed and if there were any procedural errors that could warrant a dismissal of the appeal.

The court found that the appellant's failure to comply with the annual reporting obligation was indeed an offence under the relevant legislation. The court upheld the conviction by the Magistrate, noting that the conditions of parole were clear and that Hinchley had knowingly breached them. The District Court also confirmed that the appeal process was correctly followed, and there were no procedural errors that could affect the outcome. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the orders imposed by the Magistrate were confirmed.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Appeal against conviction dismissed.

(2) I confirm the orders imposed by the Magistrate.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Hinchley v R [2023] NSWDC 18
Hearing dates:	31 January 2023
Date of orders:	08 February 2023
Decision date:	08 February 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Scotting DCJ
Decision:	(1) Appeal against conviction dismissed. (2) I confirm the orders imposed by the Magistrate.
Catchwords:	CRIME — Appeal and review — Appeal from Local Court to District Court — By person convicted against conviction - failure to comply with annual reporting obligation
Legislation Cited:	Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Regulation 2015 (NSW) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 Interpretation Act 1987
Cases Cited:	AGv Director of Public Prosecutions [2015] NSWCA 218 Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenuew (Northern Territory) (2009) 239 CLR 27 Certain Lloyd’s Underwriters v Cross (2012) 87 ALJR 131 Ex parteClubb v Westpac Banking Corporation (1990) 93 ALR 123 Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503 Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118 GianoutsasvGlykis [2006] NSWCCA 137 Lumney v Director of Public Prosecutions [2021] NSWCA 186 McNab v Director of Public Prosecutions [2021] NSWCA 298 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 Re Bolton; Ex Parte Beane (1987) 162 CLR 514 Taylor v Owners of Strata Plan 11564 (2014) 253 CLR 531 Unions NSW v New South Wales (2019) 264 CLR 595
Texts Cited:	Herzfeld and Prince, Interpretation, 2nd edition, Thomson Reuters, 2020, Sydney.
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Marcus Hinchley v Rex
Representation:	Counsel: J Martin (Appellant) Solicitors: K Legal Services (Appellant) Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Rex)
File Number(s):	2021/161157
Publication restriction:	None
Decision under appeal	Court or tribunal: Downing Centre Jurisdiction: Local Court Date of Decision: 24 May 2022 Before: Magistrate Crofts