Re Griffin - [2020] VSC 626

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2020 0188

IN THE MATTER OF the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

-and-

IN THE MATTER OF an application for bail by TAYLOR GRIFFIN

---

JUDGE:	LASRY J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	24 August 2020
DATE OF RULING:	24 August 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Griffin
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VSC 626

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Application for bail — Charges of aggravated burglary, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, making threats to kill and committing an indictable offence whilst on bail — New facts established — Whether compelling reason exist — Delay caused by COVID-19 — Acceptance in residential drug rehabilitation program — Bail granted on interim basis with conditions — Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 3AAA, 4AA, 4C, 4D, 5AAAA, 4E, s 18AA, — Re Application for Bail by Taylor Griffin [2020] VSC 312.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr D Sala	Emma Turnbull Lawyers
For the Respondent	Mr N Hutton	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

Taylor Griffin (the ‘applicant’) seeks a grant of bail in respect of nine charges that arise from an incident on 15 January 2020 involving the applicant’s former partner (‘BS’) and her friend (‘MM’). The applicant is charged with:

·two counts of aggravated burglary (offensive weapon and person present);
·intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence;
·intentionally causing serious injury;
·recklessly causing serious injury;
·intentionally causing injury;
·recklessly causing injury;
·making threats to kill; and
·committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.

The applicant has been in custody since the date of his arrest on 15 January 2020.

He has previously been refused bail on two occasions, most recently in this Court on 27 May 2020 by J Dixon J.[1] Having read her Honour’s reasons, her refusal of bail was on the basis that the applicant had not shown a compelling reason justifying the grant of bail.
[1]Re Application for Bail by Taylor Griffin [2020] VSC 312 [41]–[42] (‘earlier bail decision’).

Her Honour went on to express the belief that, despite the supports available to him, ‘the applicant is quite likely to relapse into drug use [and t]he mental and emotional chaos that might then ensue’[2] would, in combination with other factors, increase his risk of engaging in the conduct of the kind identified in s 4E(1) of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic) (the ‘Act’).
[2]Ibid [43].

The present application, filed on 10 August 2020, is expressed to be made on the basis of new facts and circumstances.[3] While the applicant largely relied on the same grounds as those advanced in the previous application, the first new circumstance on this application is that he has been accepted into a residential rehabilitation program in Shepparton known as The Cottage to address his drug use.
[3]Bail Act 1977 (Vic) s 18AA (‘Bail Act’).

The second new circumstance is that, since 27 May 2020, the delay…

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 Re Griffin

Details

AGLC: Re Griffin [2020] VSC 626
Case: [2020] VSC 626
Decision Date: 24 August 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The application in Re Griffin concerned the respondent, Taylor Griffin, who sought bail on interim terms, having been charged with aggravated burglary, intentionally causing serious injury in circumstances of gross violence, making threats to kill and committing an indictable offence whilst on bail. The matter was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. Griffin's application arose from new facts that had come to light, and he sought bail on the basis of a compelling reason existing to grant it.

The court was required to determine whether compelling reasons existed for granting bail, given the seriousness of the charges and the fact that Griffin had committed an indictable offence while on bail. In making its decision, the court considered the impact of COVID-19 on the administration of justice, as well as Griffin's acceptance into a residential drug rehabilitation program. The court found that there were compelling reasons to grant bail, given these new facts.

The court noted that the charges were serious, but that there were compelling reasons for granting bail in light of the new facts. The court found that the impact of COVID-19 on the administration of justice was a compelling reason to grant bail, as it was in the interests of justice to do so. The court also found that Griffin's acceptance into a residential drug rehabilitation program was another compelling reason to grant bail. The court was satisfied that Griffin would comply with the conditions of bail, which included that he reside at a specified address and attend the drug rehabilitation program. The court granted bail on interim terms, with conditions.

Orders