State of New South Wales v SLD

[2024] NSWSC 1595

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:

State of New South Wales v SLD [2024] NSWSC 1595

Hearing dates:

03 December 2024

Date of orders:

03 December 2024

Decision date:

03 December 2024

Jurisdiction:

Common Law

Before:

Garling J

Decision:

(1) Order pursuant to s 18A Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 that there be an Interim Detention Order commencing on 12 December 2024 and continuing to 18 December 2024.

(2) Order pursuant to s 20(1) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 that a warrant be issued for the committal of the defendant to a correctional centre for the duration of the Interim Detention Order.

(3)   Order until further order that access to the Supreme Court file in respect of any document shall not be granted to a non-party without the leave of a judge of the Court and, if any application for access is made by a non party in respect of any document, that the parties are to be notified by the Registrar so as to allow them an opportunity to be heard in relation to the application for access.

(4)   Stand over the further hearing of the application for interim and interlocutory relief set out in the Summons filed on 4 November 2024 to 17 December 2024.

(5)   Grant the parties liberty to apply.

(6)   Direct that the solicitor for the plaintiff is to inform my Chambers by email of the outcome of each of the proceedings in the Local Court on 5 December 2024 and of the District Court on 12 December 2024.

Catchwords:

HIGH RISK OFFENDERS – Interim detention orders – Application – Where defendant is in custody awaiting sentencing – Interim detention order made for as short a period as practicable.

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006

Cases Cited:

Not Applicable

Texts Cited:

Not Applicable

Category:

Procedural rulings

Parties:

State of New South Wales (P)
SLD (D)

Representation:

Counsel:
G Mahony SC / I Fraser (P)
D Bhutani (D)

Solicitors:
Crown Solicitors (P)
Ryan Payton Le, Solicitors (D)

File Number(s):

2024/412652

Publication restriction:

See suppression/non-publication orders made on 3 December 2024.

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

1. Listed before me today is the hearing of part of a Summons filed on 4 November 2024, by the State of New South Wales against the defendant, to whom a pseudonym SLD has been given.

2. Today, the plaintiff seeks an Interim Detention Order (“IDO”) for a period of 28 days, and orders appointing two qualified experts to examine the defendant and directing the defendant to attend those examinations. Other consequential orders are sought.

3. The defendant has in the past been the subject of both a Continuing Detention Order (“CDo”) and an Extended Supervision Order (“ESO”). Proceedings have been brought against him in the District Court of New South Wales with respect to three offences of being in breach of an ESO or, put differently, failing to comply with an ESO. He has been convicted of one offence of failing to comply with an ESO. He is to be sentenced for that offence in the District Court on 12 December 2024, that is to say in 9 days’ time.

4. As well, proceedings have been taken against the defendant for an offence contrary to s 60A(1) Crimes Act 1900 of stalking, harassment or intimidating a law enforcement officer in the execution of the officer’s duty; and one count of stalking, harassment and intimidating a person with whom a law enforcement officer has a domestic relationship, contrary to s 160B(1) Crimes Act. Those matters were listed for hearing at the Wollongong Local Court on 17 October 2024 and, at the conclusion of those proceedings, judgment was reserved. Judgment is to be delivered on 5 December 2024.

5. Counsel for the defendant accepts that if his client is convicted on either or both of those charges, it is unlikely that any sentence proceedings would be able to be heard in the Local Court in 2024 and would not take place until, probably, February 2025 or thereabouts. Counsel for the defendant also accepts, as I think is inevitable, that if his client is convicted of one or both of those offences, bail would be refused pending the sentence hearing in 2025.

6. It is not known and cannot be known whether or not any conviction will be entered in the Local Court, and it is not known and cannot be known whether any sentence to be imposed in the District Court will involve any further period of time in custody for the defendant. But in either case, i.e., in the case of either the Local Court proceedings or the District Court proceedings, if the result of that is that the defendant remains in custody, then the obtaining of a 28 day IDO would be inutile. That inutility may continue for some period if events transpire with the defendant to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment having been convicted of the offences in the Local Court.

7. I do not by these remarks wish it to be thought that any comment I make in this ex tempore judgment is intended to influence in any way the proceedings presently before the Local Court, which are as yet unresolved, or the proceedings presently before the District Court, which are also not finally resolved. I specifically note that it is not my intention so to do. However, as a matter of practical reality, hearing and determining this application today may well be rendered otiose by something which happens in the Local Court or the District Court.

8. In those circumstances, it is my view that the proper course is to make an IDO for as short a period as is practicable and then to enable the matter to be heard, if required, shortly after the conclusion of the proceedings in the District Court. Neither party raised any objection of substance to that course being followed. It would also enable the Court, depending on what occurs in the Local Court or the District Court, at an early stage to determine what further course is required in these proceedings.

Orders

9. I make the following orders,

1. Order pursuant to s 18A Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 that there be an Interim Detention Order commencing on 12 December 2024 and continuing to 18 December 2024.

2. Order pursuant to s 20(1) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 that a warrant be issued for the committal of the defendant to a correctional centre for the duration of the Interim Detention Order.

3. Order until further order that access to the Supreme Court file in respect of any document shall not be granted to a non-party without the leave of a judge of the Court and, if any application for access is made by a non‑party in respect of any document, that the parties are to be notified by the Registrar so as to allow them an opportunity to be heard in relation to the application for access.

4. Stand over the further hearing of the application for interim and interlocutory relief set out in the Summons filed on 4 November 2024 to 17 December 2024.

5. Grant the parties liberty to apply.

6. Direct that the solicitor for the plaintiff is to inform my Chambers by email of the outcome of each of the proceedings in the Local Court on 5 December 2024 and of the District Court on 12 December 2024.

**********

Decision last updated: 12 December 2024