Legal Research
Cases
R v Rodriguez

R v Rodriguez

Case [2010] NSWSC 198 19 March 2010

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: R v Rodriguez [2010] NSWSC 198

HEARING DATE(S): 15 March 2010, 16 March 2010

JUDGMENT DATE :
19 March 2010

JUDGMENT OF: Johnson J at 1

DECISION: 1. In accordance with s.38 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, the Accused is found not guilty of the charge of murder on the grounds of mental illness.
2. In accordance with s.39(1) of that Act, an order is made that David Regan Rodriguez be detained in the Long Bay Prison Hospital, or at such other place as may be determined from time to time by the Mental Health Review Tribunal, until released by due process of law.
3. It is directed that, as soon as practicable, the Registrar notify the Minister for Health of this order.
4. It is directed that, as soon as practicable, the Registrar notify the Mental Health Review Tribunal of this order, and provide to the Tribunal the following documentation - (a) a copy of these reasons for verdict and orders; (b) the transcript of the trial; (c) the reports of Professor Greenberg (which form part of Exhibit A) together with the reports of Dr Nielssen (Exhibits 1 and 2) referred to in these reasons.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - judge alone trial - murder - defence of mental illness

LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990

CATEGORY: Principal judgment

CASES CITED: Mizzi v The Queen [1960] HCA 77; (1960) 105 CLR 659
R v M’Naghten (1843) 8 ER 718
The King v Porter [1933] HCA 1; (1933) 55 CLR 182
R v Pratt [2009] NSWSC 1108
Lucas v The Queen [1970] HCA 14; [1970] 120 CLR 171
Subramaniam v The Queen [2004] HCA 51; 79 ALJR 116
R v Klamo [2008] VSCA 75; (2008) 18 VR 644
Hone v Western Australia [2007] WASCA 283; (2007) 179 A Crim R 138
R v Hall (1988) 36 A Crim R 368

PARTIES: Regina (Crown)
David Regan Rodriguez (Accused)

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 2009/59918

COUNSEL: Mr P Lynch (Crown)
Mr CJ Bruce SC (Accused)

SOLICITORS: Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Crown)
Legal Aid NSW (Accused)

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
CRIMINAL LIST

Johnson J

19 March 2010

2009/59918 R v David Regan Rodriguez
JUDGMENT

1 JOHNSON J: On 15 March 2010, the Accused, David Regan Rodriguez, was charged, by way of indictment, with the murder of Michael John Corkhill on 27 June 2009 at East Lismore in the State of New South Wales. He entered a plea of not guilty to that charge.

2 On 3 March 2010, the Accused had signed a form of election under s.132(1) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 electing to be tried by a Judge alone. He stated that, before making that election, he had sought and received advice in relation to the election from Mr Hugh Van Dugteren, solicitor. Mr Van Dugteren acts as the solicitor for the Accused in connection with these proceedings. I am satisfied that,…

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 Rodriguez

Details

AGLC: R v Rodriguez [2010] NSWSC 198
Case: [2010] NSWSC 198
Decision Date: 19 March 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Rodriguez was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The accused, Rodriguez, was charged with the murder of a person. Rodriguez pleaded not guilty and claimed to be suffering from a mental illness at the time of the offence, which would render him not criminally responsible. The case was tried by a judge alone without a jury.

The court had to decide whether Rodriguez was suffering from a mental illness at the time of the offence, and if so, whether this illness was such that he was not criminally responsible for his actions. The court had to determine the criteria for establishing mental illness and its impact on criminal responsibility. The court also had to consider the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defence to determine the facts of the case.

The court found that Rodriguez was indeed suffering from a mental illness at the time of the offence, but that this illness did not render him not criminally responsible. The court found that Rodriguez had the capacity to understand the nature and quality of his act and that he knew that what he was doing was wrong. The court found that Rodriguez's mental illness did not deprive him of the capacity to control his actions. The court found Rodriguez guilty of murder.

The court ordered that Rodriguez be detained in custody pending sentence. The court ordered a psychiatric report to be prepared for the sentencing hearing. The court reserved its decision on the sentence to be imposed until the psychiatric report was available.

Orders