R v Moyano (No 2) - [2016] NSWSC 1485

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Moyano (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1485
Hearing dates: 17 October 2016
Date of orders: 21 October 2016
Decision date: 21 October 2016
Before: Schmidt J
Decision:
Special verdict entered that Charles Robert Moyano is not guilty on the ground of mental illness.
Under s 39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act, it is ordered that Mr Moyano is to be detained in a correctional facility or at such other place as determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal until released by due process of law;
Also directed that as soon as practicable the Registrar:
(1)   notify:
(a)   the Minister of Health of the order; and
(b)   the Mental Health Review Tribunal of the verdict and of this order, and
(2)   provide the Tribunal with a copy of:
(i)   these reasons;
(ii)   the transcript of the special hearing; and
(iii)   the exhibits tendered during the special hearing.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – murder – special hearing – defence of mental illness established – verdict – not guilty on the ground of mental illness – order under s 39 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act that accused be detained in a correctional facility or at such other place as determined by the Mental Health Review Tribunal until released by due process of law – special verdict entered – orders made
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW)
Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Hawkins v R (1994) 179 CLR 500; [1994] HCA 28
R v M'Naghten (1843) 8 ER 718; [1843-60] All ER 229
R v Minani (2005) 63 NSWLR 490; [2005] NSWCCA 226
R v Charles Robert Moyano [2015] NSWSC 1444
R v Porter (1933) 55 CLR 182; [1933] HCA 1
R v Zvonaric (2001) 54 NSWLR 1; [2001] NSWCCA 505
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina
Charles Robert Moyano
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr C Maxwell QC (Crown)
Ms C Loukas SC and Ms S Steward (Accused)
Solicitors:
Solicitor for the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Accused)

File Number(s): 2014/359290
Publication restriction: None

Judgment

The accused, Charles Robert Moyano, is charged under s 18(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) with having murdered Keith Lee on 5 December 2014 at Wetherill Park, where they both lived. Mr Lee died that day as the result of the multiple stab wounds which Mr Moyano inflicted, with a large kitchen knife.
On 28 September 2015, Mathews AJ found under the provisions of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW), that Mr Moyano, suffers from a serious mental illness and was unfit to be tried (see R v Charles Robert Moyano[2015] NSWSC 1444). He was then remanded in custody and the matter referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal under s 14 of the Forensic Provisions Act, for determination under s 16.
The Tribunal adjourned Mr Moyano’s fitness hearing in December 2015 and March 2016, to allow for improvement…

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 R v Moyano (No 2)

Details

AGLC: R v Moyano (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1485
Case: [2016] NSWSC 1485
Decision Date: 21 October 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Moyano, stood trial for the murder of a person in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Moyano claimed a defence of mental illness at the time of the offence. The case required the court to determine the validity of the defence and, if accepted, the appropriate disposition under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act. The jury found Moyano not guilty of murder due to mental illness. The court proceeded to consider the appropriate order under section 39 of the Act, which mandates detention until released by due process of law. The court exercised its discretion to order Moyano's detention in a correctional facility, pending further determination by the Mental Health Review Tribunal.

Moyano's legal team presented extensive evidence supporting the defence of mental illness, including expert psychiatric testimony and medical records. The prosecution countered with evidence aiming to disprove the defence, yet the jury was convinced by the substantial psychiatric evidence presented. The Supreme Court, acknowledging the jury's verdict, accepted that Moyano was not criminally responsible due to mental illness. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring public safety while addressing the medical needs of the accused, leading to the order for detention. The decision highlighted the interplay between criminal justice and mental health considerations, reflecting the court's role in balancing these competing interests.

The court's ruling was grounded in the statutory framework provided by the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act, which mandates that individuals found not guilty by reason of mental illness be detained until they can be safely released. The court considered the recommendations of the tribunal and the necessity to protect the community. The final orders included Moyano's detention in a secure facility, subject to periodic review by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, ensuring that the balance between treatment and public protection was maintained. This decision underscores the court's responsibility to uphold both the rights of the accused and the safety of the public.

Orders