Wilde v State of New South Wales

The appeal concerned an application for an extended supervision order under the *Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006* (NSW) made by the State of New South Wales against the appellant, who had served his sentence for serious sexual assault offences and was classified as a high-risk sex offender. The appeal was heard by Beazley P, McColl and Ward JJA.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the initial decision to grant an extended supervision order was erroneous, and whether the conditions imposed on that order, specifically those relating to the consumption of alcohol and illicit drugs, were correctly determined. The court was required to consider the appropriate test for imposing such conditions, including the necessary link between the condition and the risk of future offending, and the relevance of whether a condition was onerous or punitive.

The Court of Appeal found no error in the exercise of discretion by the lower court in granting the extended supervision order. Regarding the conditions, the court affirmed that the test for imposing conditions under section 11 of the Act requires a demonstrable link between the condition and the risk of future offending. The court held that the onerous or punitive nature of a condition is not determinative, provided the condition is reasonably necessary to mitigate the identified risk. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent.