R v Shannon JOHNSTON [2010] NSWDRGC 3

R v Shannon JOHNSTON [2010] NSWDRGC 3

The confidential material was relevant and important to determining suitability for a CDTO, and the public interest in maintaining good order and security in correctional centres outweighed disclosure to Mr Johnston. The Court could consider the material confidentially, and in light of the MDT report, confidential information, and Mr Johnston's significant history of violence, the Court was not satisfied that he was a suitable person for a CDTO or that it was appropriate for his sentence to be served by way of Compulsory Drug Treatment Detention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Drug Court Consideration of a Compulsory Drug Treatment Order / Judgment on Public Interest Immunity, Confidential Evidence, and Suitability for a CDTO After Referral From the Sydney District Court
Outcome
Public interest immunity upheld; confidential material considered by the Judge alone; Mr Johnston found not suitable for a CDTO.
Legal Topics
['compulsory Drug Treatment Order' 'public Interest Immunity' 'confidential Affidavits' 'procedural Fairness' 'good Order and Security in Correctional Centres' 'suitability for Compulsory Drug Treatment']
['criminal Law' 'drug Court' 'evidence' 'corrections Law'] ['compulsory Drug Treatment Order' 'public Interest Immunity' 'confidential Affidavits' 'procedural Fairness' 'good Order and Security in Correctional Centres' 'suitability for Compulsory Drug Treatment']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Drug Court Consideration of a Compulsory Drug Treatment Order / Judgment on Public Interest Immunity, Confidential Evidence, and Suitability for a CDTO After Referral From the Sydney District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether confidential information concerning Mr Johnston should be disclosed to him or considered only by the presiding Judge.' 'Whether public interest immunity should be upheld over information said to affect the good order and security of the Compulsory Drug Treatment Centre.' 'Whether Mr Johnston was a suitable person for a Compulsory Drug Treatment Order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The confidential material was relevant and important to determining suitability for a CDTO, and the public interest in maintaining good order and security in correctional centres outweighed disclosure to Mr Johnston. The Court could consider the material confidentially, and in light of the MDT report, confidential information, and Mr Johnston's significant history of violence, the Court was not satisfied that he was a suitable person for a CDTO or that it was appropriate for his sentence to be served by way of Compulsory Drug Treatment Detention.

Court Disposition

Public interest immunity upheld; confidential material considered by the Judge alone; Mr Johnston found not suitable for a CDTO.

Orders

  • ['The material provided is relevant and important to the question whether Mr Johnston is a suitable person for a CDTO.' 'The material can and should be considered by the Court on a confidential basis.' 'The information will not be disclosed to Mr Johnston.' 'Mr Johnston will not be given an opportunity to give oral...