NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Prince (Final) [2017] NSWSC 1749 Hearing dates: 11 December 2017 Decision date: 15 December 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: The application by the State for an extended supervision order is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMES (HIGH RISK OFFENDERS) ACT 2006 – application for extended supervision order – final hearing – whether unacceptable risk of defendant committing another serious violence offence – index offence wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm – very lengthy history of violent offences – most involving no or relatively minor injuries – index offence only serious violence offence – use of weapons considered – anger management problems – alcohol abuse – risk of further violent offending posed – low prospect of further offences becoming serious – supervision highly desirable – extended supervision orders not substitute for parole – application dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) s 33(1)(a) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Amendment Act 2017 (NSW) s 5B Cases Cited: Cornwall v Attorney General for New South Wales [2007] NSWCA 374 Lynn v State of New South Wales (2016) 91 NSWLR 636; [2016] NSWCA 57 Prince v R [2013] NSWCCA 274 State of New South Wales v Lynn [2013] NSWSC 1147 State of New South Wales v Prince [2017] NSWSC 1404 State of New South Wales v Wilson (Preliminary) [2017] NSWSC 1367 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Ian Prince (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: G Wright (Plaintiff) D O'Neil (Defendant)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate