State of New South Wales v Cheney (Preliminary) [2020] NSWSC 703

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Cheney (Preliminary) [2020] NSWSC 703 Hearing dates: 29 May 2020 Date of orders: 29 May 2020 Decision date: 11 June 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Campbell J Decision: See Paragraph 59 Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDERS – preliminary hearing – interim orders - s 17 considerations – whether the matters alleged justify making an order - determining whether to grant an interim detention order or an interim supervision order – considerations of likely final order a question for the final hearing Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 90A (repealed) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) ss 5C, 5D, 12, 13B(3), 14, 15(3), 15(4), s 17, s 18A, 20 Cases Cited: Attorney General for New South Wales v Tillman [2007] NSWCA 119 Cornwall v Attorney General for NSW [2007] NSWCA 374 Lynn v State of New South Wales (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of NSW (Plaintiff) Roger David Cheney (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: E. Sullivan (Plaintiff) S. Hall (Defendant)

Solicitors: Crown Solicitor (Plaintiff) Legal Aid Commission (Defendant) File Number(s): 2020/112847

Judgment 1. The total effective sentence imposed upon the defendant, Roger Cheney ("the offender"), of imprisonment for 25 years for 14 counts of connected offending in 1993, including shocking, serious child sex abuse offences, expires on 21 June 2020. The State of New South Wales ("the State") has commenced proceedings under the Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) seeking an order under s 17(1)(b) for the offender's continuing detention for a period of 3 years from the expiration of his sentence. Unless otherwise stated all references to legislation are to the Act. 2. The summons was filed on 15 April 2020 and it came before me for a preliminary hearing in accordance with s 15(3) on 29 May 2020. At the preliminary hearing the State sought an order for interim detention in accordance with s 18A and orders under s 15(4) for the appointment of two relevantly qualified experts to conduct separate examinations of the offender, furnish individual reports to the Court following each examination, and directing the offender to attend the examinations. 3. As alternative final relief, the summons claims an extended supervision order, and an interim supervision order is sought if, in the exercise of my discretion, I decline an interim detention order. 4. The offender accepts that: he is a detained offender serving a sentence of imprisonment for a serious offence to whom Part 3 of the Act applies; the application for the Continuing Detention Order has been made within time permitted by s 13B(3); the State's application has been made in accordance with the requirements of s 14; and that the evidence relied upon by the State is capable of proving that he is an offender who poses an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence if not kept under supervision. He does not accept that the matters alleged in the supporting documentation before me, if accepted at the final hearing, would establish that he is a person who poses an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence if not kept in detention.