R v White, Kaelym Haamiora [2020] NSWDC 418

R v White, Kaelym Haamiora [2020] NSWDC 418

The psychiatric evidence of Dr Dayalan and Professor Greenberg was uncontradicted and both experts concluded that Mr White was unfit to be tried, at least because he lacked capacity to appreciate the substantial effect of the evidence given against him. Since all Presser criteria must be satisfied for fitness to stand trial, the Court accepted the psychiatric conclusions and found Mr White unfit to be tried. The agreed bail amendments were appropriate because they were consequential on the change of residence and reporting place and enabled Mr White to meet surety requirements without substantially altering the existing conditions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings for Aggravated Robbery / Determination of Fitness to Be Tried and Bail Variation Application
Outcome
Accused found unfit to be tried; referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal; matter adjourned for mention; fresh bail granted by consent on varied conditions.
Legal Topics
['fitness to Be Tried' 'aggravated Robbery' 'referral to Mental Health Review Tribunal' 'variation of Bail Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'mental Health' 'bail'] ['fitness to Be Tried' 'aggravated Robbery' 'referral to Mental Health Review Tribunal' 'variation of Bail Conditions']

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

Criminal Proceedings for Aggravated Robbery / Determination of Fitness to Be Tried and Bail Variation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Kaelym Haamiora White was unfit to be tried for aggravated robbery.' 'Whether, if unfit to be tried, the accused should be referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal under s 14(a) of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990.' "Whether the accused's bail conditions should be varied by consent."]

Ratio Decidendi

The psychiatric evidence of Dr Dayalan and Professor Greenberg was uncontradicted and both experts concluded that Mr White was unfit to be tried, at least because he lacked capacity to appreciate the substantial effect of the evidence given against him. Since all Presser criteria must be satisfied for fitness to stand trial, the Court accepted the psychiatric conclusions and found Mr White unfit to be tried. The agreed bail amendments were appropriate because they were consequential on the change of residence and reporting place and enabled Mr White to meet surety requirements without substantially altering the existing conditions.

Court Disposition

Accused found unfit to be tried; referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal; matter adjourned for mention; fresh bail granted by consent on varied conditions.

Orders

  • ['I find that the accused, Kaelym Haamiora White, is unfit to be tried for the offence of aggravated robbery.' 'Pursuant to s 14(a) of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, I refer the accused to the Mental Health Review Tribunal.' 'I direct that that a copy of the reports of Dr Dayalan and Professor...