7Pre-trial procedures

#### 7 Pre-trial procedures 7 Pre-trial procedures > > (1) An application for an extended supervision order must be served on the offender concerned within 2 business days after the application is filed in the Supreme Court or within such further time as the Supreme Court may allow. > > > (2) The State must disclose to the offender such documents, reports and other information as are relevant to the proceedings on the application (whether or not intended to be tendered in evidence)— > > > > > (a) in the case of anything that is available when the application is made, as soon as practicable after the application is made, and > > > > > (b) in the case of anything that subsequently becomes available, as soon as practicable after it becomes available. > > > > Note— > > > > Section 21A (6) provides that the State must not disclose a victim statement to the offender unless the person who made the statement consents to the disclosure. > > > (3) A preliminary hearing into the application is to be conducted by the Supreme Court within 28 days after the application is filed in the Supreme Court or within such further time as the Supreme Court may allow. > > > (4) If, following the preliminary hearing, it is satisfied that the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of an extended supervision order, the Supreme Court must make orders— > > > > > (a) appointing— > > > > > > > (i) 2 qualified psychiatrists, or > > > > > > > (ii) 2 registered psychologists, or > > > > > > > (iii) 1 qualified psychiatrist and 1 registered psychologist, or > > > > > > > (iv) 2 qualified psychiatrists and 2 registered psychologists, > > > > > > to conduct separate psychiatric or psychological examinations (as the case requires) of the offender and to furnish reports to the Supreme Court on the results of those examinations, and > > > > > (b) directing the offender to attend those examinations. > > > (5) If, following the preliminary hearing, it is not satisfied that the matters alleged in the supporting documentation would, if proved, justify the making of an extended supervision order, the Supreme Court must dismiss the application. > > **s 7:** Am 2007 No 97, Sch 3.1 \[4\]; 2008 No 53, Sch 9 \[2\]; 2010 No 137, Sch 1 \[4\]; 2013 No 4, Sch 1 \[10\]; 2014 No 58, Sch 1 \[2\].