Legal Research
Cases
State of New South Wales v Bowen (Preliminary)

State of New South Wales v Bowen (Preliminary)

Case [2019] NSWSC 570 16 May 2019

Criminal Liability

Interim Supervision Order

Examination Order

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Bowen (Preliminary) [2019] NSWSC 570
Hearing dates: 3 May 2019
Date of orders: 16 May 2019
Decision date: 16 May 2019
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Wright J
Decision:
(1)   Two qualified psychiatrists or registered psychologists (or one of each such persons) as agreed by the parties are appointed to conduct separate psychiatric or psychological examinations of the defendant and are to furnish reports to the Supreme Court on the results of those examinations by a date to be agreed by the parties.

(2)   The defendant is directed to attend those examinations.

(3)   The defendant is to be the subject of an interim supervision order from midnight on 31 May 2019.

(4)   The interim supervision order is to be for a period of 28 days.

(5)   The defendant is to comply with the conditions set out in the Schedule to these reasons for judgment for the period of the interim supervision order.

(6)   Access to the Court's file shall not be granted to a non-party without leave of a Judge of the Court, and with prior notice to the parties so as to allow them an opportunity to be heard in respect of the application for access.

(7)   Liberty is granted to the parties to approach the Common Law list clerk to obtain hearing dates for any application for an extension of the interim order, for the final hearing of the matter, and to fix a timetable for the filing and serving of evidence and submissions.
(8)   Liberty is granted to the parties to apply on one day’s notice in relation to order 1 if the parties cannot reach agreement for the purposes of that order.
Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDERS – application for extended supervision order – preliminary hearing – whether high degree of probability that offender posed unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence on assumption that allegations in supporting documentation proved – interim supervision order and examination order made – no point of principle
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)
Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW)
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Attorney General for New South Wales v Tillman [2007] NSWCA 119
Cornwall v Attorney General for New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 374
Lynn v State of New South Wales (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57
State of New South Wales v Golding (Preliminary) [2018] NSWSC 1041
State of New South Wales v Grooms (Final) [2019] NSWSC 353
State of New South Wales v Ley Thomas Baker (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 483
State of New South Wales v McGee (Preliminary) [2019] NSWSC 53
State of New South Wales v McQuilton (Final) [2019] NSWSC 265
State of New South Wale v Steven Single [2019] NSWSC 176
State of New South Wales v Weribone [2016] NSWSC 1474
State of New South Wales v White (Final) [2018] NSWSC 1943
State of NSW v Farringdon [2018] NSWSC…

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 State of New South Wales v Bowen (Preliminary)

Details

AGLC: State of New South Wales v Bowen (Preliminary) [2019] NSWSC 570
Case: [2019] NSWSC 570
Decision Date: 16 May 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In this matter, the State of New South Wales brought an application against Bowen, a high-risk offender, for an extended supervision order. The dispute centred around Bowen's potential to commit another serious offence, and the application was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The state argued that there was a high degree of probability that Bowen posed an unacceptable risk, based on allegations detailed in supporting documentation.

The primary legal issue for the court was whether there was a sufficient basis to grant the interim supervision order and examination order. This required the court to assess the likelihood of Bowen reoffending if the allegations were proven. The court examined the credibility and weight of the evidence provided by the state and considered whether it established a high degree of probability that Bowen posed an unacceptable risk.

The court determined that the state had presented a prima facie case warranting the interim supervision order and examination order. The evidence provided demonstrated a high degree of probability that Bowen posed an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence, assuming the allegations were proven. The court found no point of principle that would prevent the granting of the orders at this stage. Consequently, the court made the interim supervision order and examination order in favour of the state.

The court's final orders included the granting of an interim supervision order and an examination order, pending further evidence and a full hearing on the application for an extended supervision order.

Orders