NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: State of New South Wales v Sleeman (Preliminary) [2018] NSWSC 562 Hearing dates: 23 April 2018 Decision date: 01 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: R A Hulme J Decision: Interim supervision order for 28 days with a qualified psychiatrist and a registered psychologist appointed to conduct separate examinations of the defendant Catchwords: HIGH RISK OFFENDER – serious sex offender – extended supervision order preliminary hearing – interim supervision order hearing – whether matters alleged would if proved satisfy the court to a high degree of probability that the defendant poses an unacceptable risk of committing another serious offence if not kept under supervision – where defendant diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome – where defendant had sexual assault and indecent assault convictions – where defendant had multiple convictions for breaches of protection orders – where defendant's risk assessment in highest level – interim supervision order granted – two psychiatrists and/or psychologists to conduct examinations of the defendant and furnish reports for final hearing Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 (NSW) s 5(2) Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Pt 3 Div 10 Crimes (High Risk Offenders) Act 2006 (NSW) ss 3, 5, 5B, 5D, 5H, 5I, 6, 7, 9, 10A Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 s 32 Summary Offences Act 1988 s 11G Cases Cited: Attorney General for New South Wales v Steadman [2016] NSWSC 174 Attorney General for New South Wales v Tillman [2007] NSWCA 119 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 State of New South Wales v Brookes [2008] NSWSC 150 State of New South Wales v French (Final) [2017] NSWSC 1475 State of New South Wales v Kamm (Final) [2016] NSWSC 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: State of New South Wales (Plaintiff) Nathan Sleeman (Defendant) Representation: Counsel: Ms D New (Plaintiff) Ms A Hawkins (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