R v Mr L (a pseudonym) - [2025] NSWSC 1194

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Mr L (a pseudonym) [2025] NSWSC 1194
Hearing dates: 08 October 2025
Date of orders: 08 October 2025
Decision date: 08 October 2025
Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal
Before: Sweeney J
Decision:
(1) This Court has the jurisdiction and the power to consider Mr L’s application.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – application for withdrawal of guilty plea – separate question of whether the Court has the jurisdiction and the power to grant leave to withdraw the plea of guilty – where the applicant pleaded guilty in the Local Court to a charge of murder – where the guilty plea was affirmed in the Supreme Court Arraignments List – where the applicant has not yet been sentenced – whether the entry of a conviction in the JusticeLink system amounted to the finalisation of the proceedings – consideration of the principle of finality – the Court has the jurisdiction and the power to consider the application

Legislation Cited:
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) ss 101, 102, 103
Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) r 3M

Cases Cited:
Burrell v The Queen (2008) 238 CLR 218; [2008] HCA 34
Delaney v R [2025] NSWCCA 76
Dickson v R (No 2) [2018] NSWCCA 183
Garcia-Godos v R; MH v R [2023] NSWCCA 145; (2023) 309 A Crim R 370
Maxwell v The Queen (1996) 184 CLR 501; [1996] HCA 46
R v Holton [2004] NSWCCA 214
R v Lapa (No 2) (1995) 80 A Crim R 398
Tsoumbanellis v R [2025] NSWCCA 107
White v R (2022) 110 NSWLR 163; [2022] NSWCCA 241

Category: Procedural rulings
Parties: Mr L (a pseudonym) (Applicant)
Crown (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
C McGorey (Applicant)
G J Tabuteau (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Ting Legal Criminal Defence Lawyers (Applicant)
Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/78295-1
Publication restriction: N/A

Ex-tempore JUDGMENT [revised]

SWEENEY J: Mr L entered a plea of guilty in the Local Court on 28 August 2024 to a charge of murder. On 6 September 2024 he appeared in the Arraignments List in the Supreme Court and adhered to his plea of guilty on that charge. He now applies for leave to withdraw his plea of guilty to that charge.
The Crown’s position is that the Court has no jurisdiction or power to set aside Mr L’s conviction, ordered by Wilson J in the Arraignments List on 6 September 2024, and perfected in the Court record by entry into the JusticeLink system, and therefore the Court has no jurisdiction or power to grant leave to Mr L to withdraw his plea of guilty to the murder charge.
The Crown asked that I deal with that issue of jurisdiction and power as a separate, preliminary question. Mr McGorey of counsel on behalf of Mr L was content to proceed in that way. Both Counsel have provided written submissions, which they emphasised in oral submissions, and I was assisted by their submissions.
The Crown’s submissions were…

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 Mr L (a pseudonym)

Details

AGLC: R v Mr L (a pseudonym) [2025] NSWSC 1194
Case: [2025] NSWSC 1194
Decision Date: 08 October 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this case, Mr L, referred to by a pseudonym, sought to withdraw his guilty plea to a charge of murder, which was initially entered in the Local Court and subsequently affirmed in the Supreme Court Arraignments List. The application was brought before the Supreme Court, which needed to determine if it had the jurisdiction and the power to grant leave for Mr L to withdraw his plea. The matter had not yet reached the sentencing phase.

The court's task was to examine two primary legal questions: firstly, whether the entry of a conviction in the JusticeLink system constituted the finalisation of the proceedings; and secondly, the principle of finality in criminal proceedings. The court also considered if there were exceptional circumstances that warranted allowing the withdrawal of the guilty plea.

The court concluded that it possessed the requisite jurisdiction and power to entertain the application for withdrawal of the guilty plea. It found that the entry of a conviction in the JusticeLink system did not equate to the finalisation of the proceedings, as it was still possible to alter the plea prior to sentencing. Additionally, the court held that the principle of finality could be set aside in exceptional circumstances. Given the seriousness of the charge and the implications of a wrongful conviction, the court determined that exceptional circumstances did exist in this case.

As a result, the Supreme Court granted Mr L leave to withdraw his guilty plea, allowing the matter to proceed to a trial. This decision underscores the court's willingness to ensure justice is served, even in cases involving serious criminal charges, by permitting the withdrawal of a plea when warranted by exceptional circumstances.

Orders