District Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Stewart (No 2) [2022] NSWDC 206 Hearing dates: 02 June 2022 Date of orders: 02 June 2022 Decision date: 02 June 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Bennett SC DCJ Decision: The reasons for my decision announced this morning have not changed and I rely upon those for the purposes of my decision Catchwords: COURTS AND JUDGES — Jurisdiction — District Court Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina (Crown) Kieran Stewart (offender) Representation: Jason Lee (Solicitor for the Crown) Daniel Thomas (Solicitor for the offender) Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aboriginal Legal Service NSW/ACT File Number(s): 2021/00149276 REVISED EX TEMPORE JUDGEMENT Introduction 1. This morning, 2 June 2022, I delivered a judgement and announced the conviction of the offender and imposed a sentence upon the offender after the matter was presented to me yesterday, 1 June 2022, including the tender of documents and the presentation of evidence from the offender, his cross-examination, and then oral submissions speaking to written submissions previously provided. The Flawed Proceedings on Sentence 1. The offender was sentenced to a term of imprisonment and after I adjourned, to resume a trial in which I am presiding, my associate realised that there was no record on JusticeLink of the accused having ever been arraigned in the District Court. The matter was called over before the Chief Judge some time earlier this year and the matter, according to the note made, was adjourned until 23 May 2022 for arraignment. I mistakenly believed that the arraignment had taken place. In fact, it had not and thus having not taken place the Court had no jurisdiction to continue with the hearing, notwithstanding the work that had been completed by this morning. The Proposed Continuation of the Proceedings 1. Upon realising the omission I reconvened the Court and the accused was arraigned when he appeared via AVL and he pleaded guilty to the charge of robbery in company. I stood the matter down thereafter for Mr Thomas, who represented the accused, to contact him to give him advice and take instructions and allow the Crown to consider what steps ought next to be taken. 2. Upon reflection it would seem to me that the course available now is for the parties, if they wish, to tender the material that was presented during the hearing yesterday, on 1 June 2022. The material would be marked as an exhibit in the proceedings now. The material tendered could include the written submissions. The parties could also tender, if they wish to do so, the oral submissions speaking to their written submissions, adding to them where they have done so, and if the offender chose to do so he could tender the evidence that was adduced viva voce on 1 June 2022, together with the cross‑examination by the Crown. 3. My next step would then be to formally convict the offender and impose a sentence in identical terms upon the reasons that I delivered ex tempore this morning. My next step in this process would be to have my ex tempore judgement provided by the Reporting Services Branch. I'll perfect it for the purposes of publication and I will attach to it the transcript of proceedings and copies of the exhibited material, to comprise one bundle to be included on the Court file. 4. The reasons for my decision announced this morning have not changed; and I would simply rely upon those for the purposes of my decision to be announced. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 09 June 2022