Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Friday, 8 November 2019 - [2019] TASSCCourtlist 200

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, FRIDAY, 8 NOVEMBER 2019

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Plea and Sentencing Submissions
Alexandra Rose Kobelke

For Mention
Fahad Al-Dakak

For Directions Hearing

Troy Daniel Perry

Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Application

Kim Evans, Secretary Department of State Growth

Peter John Cunningham

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention

Joshua Blair Read

Damien Charles Knowles

Rebecca Jayne Eirth

For Trial (part-heard)
Luke David Buck

2:15p.m.
For Mention
Victor Kent Park

For Plea
Mitchell John Campbell

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m.
For Judgment

Joseph Edward Auton v The State of Tasmania

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial

David Shaw

Michael John Benjamin Wells

Not before 3:00 p.m.
For Bail Application

Cameron Desmond Heather

Jacob Scott Keven Riley-McDonald

LAUNCESTON

Criminal Jurisdiction
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
10.00a.m.
For Trial

BPA

(Part-Heard)

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Details

AGLC: Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Friday, 8 November 2019 [2019] TASSCCourtlist 200
Case: [2019] TASSCCourtlist 200
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania, presided over by Justice GeASON, heard an appeal by Joseph Edward Auton against the State of Tasmania. The case pertains to Auton's conviction and sentence. Auton sought to appeal the conviction and sentence imposed upon him by a lower court. The primary legal issues before the court were whether the lower court erred in its interpretation of the law, the admissibility of certain evidence, and the appropriateness of the sentence.

Justice GeASON considered the arguments presented by both parties. The court meticulously examined the evidence and the legal principles relevant to the interpretation of the law and the admissibility of evidence. Justice GeASON found that the lower court had correctly applied the law and that the evidence was properly admitted. The court further assessed the sentence, determining it to be proportionate to the crime committed. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that Joseph Edward Auton's appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed, thereby affirming the decision of the lower court. Auton's conviction and sentence stand as originally imposed.

Orders