Yates v The Queen [2013] HCA 8

Yates v The Queen [2013] HCA 8

The evidence before Wallace J did not support the conclusion that the applicant constituted a constant danger to the community, nor was indefinite detention demonstrably necessary to protect society from physical harm; therefore, the s 662 order should not have been made.

Parties
Applicant: Gregory John Yates; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal, Supreme Court of Western Australia
Outcome
appeal allowed; application for special leave granted; s 662 order quashed
Legal Topics
Indefinite Detention, Sentencing Discretion, Dangerousness, Protection of Society, Intellectual Disability
Criminal Law Indefinite Detention Sentencing Discretion Dangerousness Protection of Society Intellectual Disability

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory John Yates

Applicant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal From Court of Criminal Appeal, Supreme Court of Western Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence supported indefinite detention under s 662 of the Criminal Code (WA)
  2. 2 Whether applicant constituted a constant danger to the community
  3. 3 Whether order was demonstrably necessary to protect society from physical harm

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence before Wallace J did not support the conclusion that the applicant constituted a constant danger to the community, nor was indefinite detention demonstrably necessary to protect society from physical harm; therefore, the s 662 order should not have been made.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; application for special leave granted; s 662 order quashed

Orders

  • Dispense with compliance with the time limit for filing the application for special leave to appeal and grant the application, treat the appeal as instituted and heard instanter and allowed.
  • Set aside the order of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia declining to interfere with the order made by Wallace J under s 662 of the Criminal Code (WA) and in lieu thereof quash that order.