R v Simpkins - [2019] NSWDC 75

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Simpkins [2019] NSWDC 75
Hearing dates: 20 March 2019
Date of orders: 20 March 2019
Decision date: 20 March 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Grant DCJ
Decision:
(1) Aggregate term of imprisonment of six months as a limiting term.
(2) Refer the offender to the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT)

Catchwords: CRIME — Sexual offences — Indecent assault
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Special hearing — Limiting Terms — Whether court can permit conditional release pending determination — Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) s 24.
SENTENCING — Sentencing after a special hearing
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990
Cases Cited: Chahadi v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 41
Coles v R [2016] NSWCCA 32
DPP v Khoury [2014] NSWCA 15
Duncan v R (1983) 9 A Crim R 354
Mill v R (1988) 166 CLR 59
Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610
R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121
R v Burchell (1987) 34 A Crim R 148
R v Crawley 5 A Crim R 451
R v Dent NSWCCA (unreported) 24 March 1991
R v Fisher (1989) 40 A Crim R 442
R v Hathaway [2005] NSWCCA 368
R v Liang; R v Li (1995) 82 A Crim R 82 39
R v Schwabegger (1998) 4 VR 649
R v Todd (1982) 2 NSWLR 517
R v Wilson (No 5) [2018] NSWSC 1077
Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Terence Paul Simpkins (Offender)
Representation: Counsel:
Ms C Hurford, Solicitor Advocate (Crown)
Mr N Steel (Offender)

File Number(s): 2016/00180434
Publication restriction: Victim, Witnesses, School

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR:

OVERVIEW

Terence Paul Simpkins appears before me for sentence, he has been found guilty of five counts of assaulting a male person and committing an act of indecency. Count 1 is between 1 January 1971 and 31 December 1972 at Colo in the state of New South Wales, did assault Mr M and commit an act of indecency on him, contrary to s 81 of the Crimes Act 1900.
Count 2 is that between 1 January 1971 and 31 December 1972 at Colo in the state of New South Wales did assault Mr M, a male person and commit an act of indecency on him, contrary to s 81 of the Crimes Act 1900.
Count 3 is between 1 January 1971 and 31 December 1972 at Colo in the state of New South Wales, did assault Mr M, a male person and commit an act of indecency on him contrary to s 81 of the Crimes Act 1900.
Count 4 between 1 January 1971 and 31 December 1972 at Colo in the state of New South Wales, did assault Mr M a male person and commit an act of indecency on him, contrary to s 81 of the Crimes Act 1900. And count 5 is between 1 June 1971 and 30 June 1973 at Gunnedah in the…

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 Simpkins

Details

AGLC: R v Simpkins [2019] NSWDC 75
Case: [2019] NSWDC 75
Decision Date: 20 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Simpkins was heard in a court in New South Wales. The defendant was charged with an indecent assault, and the case involved considerations under the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW). The central dispute was whether the court could permit conditional release of the offender pending the determination of their mental health status, as provided for under section 24 of the Act. This required the court to balance the defendant's right to liberty with the need to protect the community.

The legal issues that the court had to resolve included the interpretation and application of section 24 of the Act. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the conditions for conditional release were met and if such a release would not pose an unacceptable risk to the community. The court also needed to consider the appropriate sentencing in light of the defendant's mental health issues and the need for any potential treatment.

The court held that the provisions of section 24 of the Act allowed for conditional release pending the determination of the defendant's mental health status. The court found that the conditions for such a release were met and that there was no unacceptable risk to the community. The court imposed an aggregate term of imprisonment of six months as a limiting term, and referred the offender to the Mental Health Review Tribunal. The court considered this to be an appropriate balance between the defendant's rights and the need to protect the community.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Aggregate term of imprisonment of six months as a limiting term.

(2) Refer the offender to the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT)

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Simpkins [2019] NSWDC 75
Hearing dates:	20 March 2019
Date of orders:	20 March 2019
Decision date:	20 March 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Grant DCJ
Decision:	(1) Aggregate term of imprisonment of six months as a limiting term. (2) Refer the offender to the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT)
Catchwords:	CRIME — Sexual offences — Indecent assault CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — Special hearing — Limiting Terms — Whether court can permit conditional release pending determination — Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) s 24. SENTENCING — Sentencing after a special hearing
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990
Cases Cited:	Chahadi v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 41 Coles v R [2016] NSWCCA 32 DPP v Khoury [2014] NSWCA 15 Duncan v R (1983) 9 A Crim R 354 Mill v R (1988) 166 CLR 59 Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610 R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121 R v Burchell (1987) 34 A Crim R 148 R v Crawley 5 A Crim R 451 R v Dent NSWCCA (unreported) 24 March 1991 R v Fisher (1989) 40 A Crim R 442 R v Hathaway [2005] NSWCCA 368 R v Liang; R v Li (1995) 82 A Crim R 82 39 R v Schwabegger (1998) 4 VR 649 R v Todd (1982) 2 NSWLR 517 R v Wilson (No 5) [2018] NSWSC 1077 Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Terence Paul Simpkins (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Ms C Hurford, Solicitor Advocate (Crown) Mr N Steel (Offender)
File Number(s):	2016/00180434
Publication restriction:	Victim, Witnesses, School