R v Connors (No 2)

The case of R v Connors (No 2) involved the defendant, Stanley Shane Connors, and the Crown. The primary dispute was whether the Drug and Alcohol Treatment Order (DAATO) imposed on Connors should be cancelled due to his failure to comply with its conditions. The matter was heard in the Magistrates Court of the Australian Capital Territory. The court was required to consider whether Connors' conduct justified the cancellation of the DAATO and whether his continued participation in the treatment program was likely to achieve the intended objectives of the order.

The legal issues before the court involved interpreting the conditions of the DAATO and assessing whether Connors' refusal to comply with these conditions warranted the cancellation of the order. The court had to determine if Connors' actions indicated that he was unwilling or unlikely to comply with the DAATO, and if the continuation of the treatment and supervision order would likely not achieve the objects of the DAATO. Furthermore, the court needed to evaluate whether Connors posed an unacceptable risk to the safety or welfare of a person in the community.

The court found that Connors had failed to comply with the obligations of the DAATO, which justified the application for cancellation. However, the court determined that Connors was unwilling or unlikely to comply with a condition of the DAATO. It was also found that the continuation of the treatment and supervision order would likely not achieve the objects of the DAATO, and that Connors posed an unacceptable risk to the safety or welfare of a person in the community. Despite these findings, the court dismissed the application for cancellation, instead reinstating the suspension of imprisonment under the custodial part of the DAATO. The court ordered Connors to proceed to Canberra Recovery Services immediately and attend a review of the DAATO via electronic means on 18 March 2022.