Stanley v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)

Stanley (the applicant) sought judicial review of a decision by the District Court of New South Wales, which had dismissed his appeal against a sentence imposed by the Local Court. The applicant had pleaded guilty to offences under the *Firearms Act 1996* (NSW) and was sentenced to a full-time custodial term of three years. His appeal to the District Court included a submission that this sentence should be served by way of an intensive correction order. The District Court dismissed the appeal, and the applicant contended this dismissal constituted jurisdictional error.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the District Court judge committed jurisdictional error by failing to conduct the assessment contemplated by s 66(2) of the *Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999* (NSW) when considering the applicant's submission for an intensive correction order. Section 66(2) mandates that a court must assess whether making an intensive correction order or ordering full-time detention is more likely to address the offender's risk of reoffending. The applicant argued that the District Court's rejection of his submission without undertaking this assessment amounted to jurisdictional error, which was reviewable despite the privative clause in s 176 of the *District Court Act 1973* (NSW).

The Court of Appeal held that the District Court judge had not fallen into jurisdictional error. The court reasoned that the District Court judge had implicitly considered the relevant factors under s 66(2) and had made a determination that a full-time custodial sentence was appropriate. The judge's reasons indicated an understanding of the need to balance community safety, as stipulated in s 66(1), with the other considerations for imposing an intensive correction order. The court found that the judge's decision was within the scope of the court's jurisdiction, and therefore, the applicant's claim for judicial review failed.

Consequently, the summons for judicial review was dismissed, with each party ordered to bear their own costs.