A sentencing judge imposing detention on a child under the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) must separately consider and reject each non-custodial sentencing option that is reasonably available, and must explain in the sentencing remarks the reasons for rejecting each such option. It is not sufficient to merely state that all options were considered. The observations in R v DBT [2020] QCA 170 suggesting otherwise should not be followed. A sentencing option does not cease to be 'available' merely because it was not pressed in counsel's submissions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 5 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.