State of New South Wales v Costigan (Final)

In this case, the State of New South Wales sought to make an extended supervision order in relation to Costigan, a person deemed a high-risk offender. The dispute centred on whether Costigan posed an unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence, warranting such an order. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the trial judge correctly determined that Costigan presented an unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence, which would justify the making of an extended supervision order. The court had to consider whether the trial judge properly assessed the risk of reoffending by Costigan, particularly in light of his criminal history, which included one serious violent offence but multiple instances of violent behaviour.

The court found that the trial judge did not adequately consider Costigan's full history of violent conduct, focusing primarily on the single serious violent offence. The court held that an extended supervision order could be made if the offender presents an unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence, and this risk must be assessed in the context of the offender's entire history of violent conduct, not just isolated incidents. The trial judge's error in not considering the totality of Costigan's violent history was deemed to be a significant misdirection.

Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the extended supervision order was quashed. The matter was remitted back to the lower court for reconsideration of the application for an extended supervision order, taking into account the totality of Costigan's violent history.