DPP (NSW) v Saunders [2017] NSWSC 760
Please click to access DPP (NSW) v Saunders [2017] NSWSC 760
- Section 32 (3) (b) requires that the person or place nominated in the orders to be specified with some precision.
- Failing to name a particular person or place would render enforcement under ss 32 (3A)- (3D) virtually nugatory.
Confos v DPP NSWSC 1159
Please click to access Confos v DPP NSWSC 1159
- Refusal of s32 appears to be an interlocutory order at [2].
- Weight given to various factors a matter for each magistrate.
DPP v Albon [2000] NSWSC 896
Please click to access DPP v Albon [2000] NSWSC 896
- Support Plans – “Proper Provisions” at [26].
DPP v El Mawas [2006] NSWCA 154
Please click to access DPP v El Mawas [2006] NSWCA 154
- Procedural fairness and section 32 matters at [74].
- No requirement for a plea at [62].
- Acquired Brain Injury as mental condition for section 32.
- Section 32 is available to serious offenders.
- No exhaustive list of factors relevant to exercise of discretion at [74].
- Seriousness a factor in the exercise of discretion.
Edwards v DPP [2012] NSWSC 105
Please click to access Edwards v DPP [2012] NSWSC 105
- Section 32 and Alcohol Induced Organic Brain Injury.
- Preconditions to be satisfied in “mental condition”.
Mackie v Hunt (1989) 19 NSWLR 130
Please click to access Mackie v Hunt (1989)
- S428W (predecessor of s32) can apply whether or not a person if fit or unfit, and without first determining that situation.
Mantell v Molyneux [2006] NSWSC 955
Please click to access Mantell v Molyneux [2006] NSWSC 955
- Not necessary for fitness to plead to be determined prior to section 32 application at [16].
- Sentencing outcomes at law as part of the exercise of discretion.
- Extension of duration of final orders by use of interlocutory orders.
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
Please click to access Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39
- Mild intellectual disability can be significant.
- Potential for misunderstanding of the significance of intellectual disability by criminal justice personnel.
- Deterrence and People with Intellectual Disability at [54 – 55].
Perry v Forbes (Unreported, Supreme Court of NSW, Smart J, 21 May 1993)
Please click to access Perry v Forbes (1993)
- Section 32 has operation regardless or not a plea is entered and whether or not the defendant is fit to plead at [11].
- Consideration of outline of facts mandatory.
Police v Deng [2008] NSWLC 2
Please click to access Police v Deng [2008] NSWLC 2
- Section 32 and Traffic Matters.
R v Mailes [2001] NSWCCA 155
Please click to access R v Mailes [2001] NSWCCA 155
- Intellectual disability is eligible for section 32.
