5 November 2020; 11 and 13 November 2020 (written submissions)
Date of orders:
23 November 2020
Decision date:
23 November 2020
Jurisdiction:
Common Law - Criminal
Before:
Walton J
Decision:
The Court makes the followings orders:
(1) The Crown’s detention application is granted.
(2) The respondent’s bail is revoked and he is to be detained forthwith.
Catchwords:
BAIL – where a detention application is brought by the Crown following a grant of bail pending appeal – jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – whether special or exceptional circumstances have been established under s 22 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) – relevant principles – arguability test is only enlivened upon the Court being satisfied that an additional factor of substance has been established to support the finding of special or exceptional circumstances – youth – period in custody – delay – prior bail granted – proposed grounds of appeal – assessment of merits – detention application granted
[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 Rodriguez
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
R v Rodriguez [2020] NSWSC 1660
Case
[2020] NSWSC 1660
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of Regina v Rodriguez, the Supreme Court of New South Wales was tasked with determining an application by the Crown to revoke bail that had previously been granted to the defendant, pending an appeal. The case involved the defendant's legal team opposing the application, arguing against the revocation of the bail on the basis of the circumstances at hand. The court had to consider whether the criteria for special or exceptional circumstances under section 22 of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW) had been met, thereby justifying the revocation of the defendant's bail.
The legal issues central to the court's consideration were whether the Crown had demonstrated that special or exceptional circumstances existed to warrant the revocation of the defendant's bail and, if so, whether these circumstances were sufficient to meet the threshold required by section 22 of the Bail Act. The court had to assess the arguability test, which requires satisfaction that an additional factor of substance has been established to support the finding of special or exceptional circumstances. This involved examining the defendant's youth, the period already spent in custody, delays in the proceedings, and the proposed grounds of appeal.
The court found that the Crown had demonstrated sufficient grounds for the application, taking into account the defendant's youth, the length of time already spent in custody, and the nature of the proposed grounds of appeal. The court concluded that these factors constituted special or exceptional circumstances, warranting the revocation of the defendant's bail. The decision hinged on the arguability of the proposed grounds of appeal and the impact of the delay on the defendant's circumstances, which the court deemed to be significant enough to warrant the revocation of bail. The court granted the Crown's application, leading to the defendant's detention.