Wheadon v R [2019] NSWDC 643

Wheadon v R [2019] NSWDC 643

Given the extensive medical evidence of the appellant's major depressive disorder and PTSD, causally linked to the offending, the interests of justice and public interest are best served by quashing the convictions and sentencing orders and substituting orders under s 32 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, with a comprehensive treatment plan. This outcome appropriately recognises reduced moral culpability and community safety through supervision and treatment, consistent with authorities interpreting s 32 and the evidence before the Court.

Parties
Appellant: Gregory Wheadon; Respondent: Regina (Crown)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (severity) / Appeal From Local Court to District Court; Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Convictions and sentencing orders quashed; appellant discharged under care and supervision orders pursuant to s 32 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990; terms of Apprehended Domestic Violence Order varied.
Legal Topics
Severity Appeal, Apprehended Violence Orders, Intimidation of Police Officer, Orders Under S 32 Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990, Causal Relationship Between Mental Condition and Offending, Sentencing Principles and Public Interest
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Severity Appeal Apprehended Violence Orders Intimidation of Police Officer Orders Under S 32 Mental Health (forensic Provisions) Act 1990 Causal Relationship Between Mental Condition and Offending Sentencing Principles and Public Interest

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory Wheadon

Appellant

Regina (Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (severity) / Appeal From Local Court to District Court; Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether orders should be made under s 32 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 instead of upholding criminal convictions and sentences
  2. 2 Whether it was appropriate to quash the Magistrate's convictions and sentencing orders in light of medical evidence and the appellant's condition
  3. 3 Appropriateness of the length and terms of the apprehended domestic violence order

Ratio Decidendi

Given the extensive medical evidence of the appellant's major depressive disorder and PTSD, causally linked to the offending, the interests of justice and public interest are best served by quashing the convictions and sentencing orders and substituting orders under s 32 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990, with a comprehensive treatment plan. This outcome appropriately recognises reduced moral culpability and community safety through supervision and treatment, consistent with authorities interpreting s 32 and the evidence before the Court.

Court Disposition

Convictions and sentencing orders quashed; appellant discharged under care and supervision orders pursuant to s 32 Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990; terms of Apprehended Domestic Violence Order varied.

Orders

  • Convictions and sentencing orders of the Magistrate are quashed.
  • The defendant remain under the care of Dr Sam Nepalati; he remains under the care of Mr John Nolan, clinical psychologist; he accepts referral to a consultant psychologist for review of depression and PTSD; he accepts medication as directed by his treating doctors; he remains under the care of his cardiologist....