R v Mirza [2024] NSWDC 224

R v Mirza [2024] NSWDC 224

Because the physical acts charged in all 8 counts were proved beyond reasonable doubt and the unanimous psychiatric evidence established on the balance of probabilities that the accused had schizophrenia or paranoid schizophrenia and, because of that mental health impairment, could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether his acts were wrong, the acts were proven but the accused was not criminally responsible by reason of mental health impairment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judge Alone Trial Verdict and Orders
Outcome
Acts proven on each of the 8 counts, but the accused not criminally responsible by reason of mental health impairment; accused referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal and ordered detained pending review.
Legal Topics
['judge Alone Trial' 'mental Health Impairment Defence' 'special Verdict' 'criminal Responsibility' 'mental Health Review Tribunal Referral' 'detention Pending Review']
['crime' 'criminal Procedure' 'mental Health Forensic Provisions'] ['judge Alone Trial' 'mental Health Impairment Defence' 'special Verdict' 'criminal Responsibility' 'mental Health Review Tribunal Referral' 'detention Pending Review']

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 / Judge Alone Trial Verdict and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the accused carried out the physical acts charged in the 8 counts on the indictment.' 'Whether the accused established, on the balance of probabilities, that at the time of the acts he had a mental health impairment.' 'Whether the mental health impairment had the effect that the accused did not know the nature and quality of his acts or did not know that his acts were wrong.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the physical acts charged in all 8 counts were proved beyond reasonable doubt and the unanimous psychiatric evidence established on the balance of probabilities that the accused had schizophrenia or paranoid schizophrenia and, because of that mental health impairment, could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether his acts were wrong, the acts were proven but the accused was not criminally responsible by reason of mental health impairment.

Court Disposition

Acts proven on each of the 8 counts, but the accused not criminally responsible by reason of mental health impairment; accused referred to the Mental Health Review Tribunal and ordered detained pending review.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to s. 28 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020, in relation to each of the 8 counts on the indictment, I find the acts proven but that the accused is not criminally responsible by reason of mental health impairment.' 'I refer the accused to the Mental Health Review...