LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 25 OCTOBER 2021
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Ground Rules Hearing
AWK
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Jake Paul Killy-Vear Moltoni
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Scott Andrew Cripps
MJE
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
PTM
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am
For Trial
MJD
4.15pm
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
Heath Lance Chatters
4.15pm
For Mention via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
JCG
4.15pm
For Mention
Scott Andrew Francis Jones
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
Not before 12:00p.m.
For Ground Rules Hearing via video link from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
SRR
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie and to Risdon Prison Complex
Luke Buck
v
State of Tasmania
Monday, 25 October
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:15a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
Trent Mervyn Leonard
Shaun James Scott
For Directions Hearing
Brandon James Smith
Tyler Anthony James Causon
S C T
C L
Y S A
Andre Charles Lee
B D
C W B
Marcus Alexander Clayton
Wayne James Benjamin
Stephanie Oakford
Lydia Kean
Jae Mcdermott
Shane Eastley
Jayden Laurence Croft
Myles Brian Franklin
W J D
Corey Adam Lockwood
James Alan Cole
Brock Davey
M J P
Craig Michael West
Jonathon Henry Holmes
Corey Douglas Lovell
For First Directions Hearing
Shiralee Anne Dale
For Plea
Harley Daniel Murtagh
For Sentencing Submissions
Alec Mcgeary
For Bail Application
Luke Randall
For Bail Consent
Kyle Dion Power
Brock Everett
David Gregory Bannister
Erin Hay
Kevin Michael Phillips
W J D
2:15p.m.
For Sentence
John Charles Reardon
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Mention
Zane Andrew Henderson
Jayde Patrick Burling
Shane Vivian Smith
For Bail Consent
Brody Reginald Costello
Stewart Ashley Martin
10:00am
For Trial
Natalie Maher
(Part heard)
4:15pm
For Sentence
Dylan Maxwell Cocker
Luke Vere Goodyer
Willem Llewelyn Dawkins
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15PM
For Directions Hearing via video-link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
PTM
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Zebb Mathew Waxman
John William Milligan
Ryley Paul Lehman
Mark John Morsillo
Karli Breeze Newitt
For Sentencing Submissions
Megan Jane Dehle
For Bail Application via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Daniel Victor Gandini
For Bail Consent
Ashley Richard Stott
Zack Corey Haase
Nathan Jarard Grant
Not before 12:00p.m.
For Ground Rules Hearing via video link to Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
SRR
2:15p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Curtis Peter Reeve
4:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to Risdon Prison Complex and PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Luke Buck
v
State of Tasmania
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 360
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The parties involved in the case were Jake Paul Killy-Vear Moltoni, who was represented by Mr Moltoni, and the state of Tasmania, represented by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The dispute was a criminal trial, and the case was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania before Justice Wood. The nature of the dispute was a trial for an offence under the Criminal Code Act 1924 (Tas), namely a charge of aggravated sexual assault.
The legal issues that the court was required to decide included whether the prosecution had proved the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, whether the evidence of the complainant was reliable and credible, and whether there were any grounds for the accused to be acquitted. The court also had to consider any defence arguments that were raised by the accused, such as the possibility of consent or mistake.
The court's reasoning and outcome were based on the evidence presented in the trial, including witness testimony, expert evidence, and any other relevant material. The court had to weigh the evidence and determine whether it was sufficient to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The court also had to consider any legal arguments that were raised by either party, and apply the relevant principles of law to the facts of the case. Ultimately, the court found the accused guilty of the offence and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
The final orders made by the court included a finding of guilt, a sentence of imprisonment, and any other orders that were necessary to give effect to the sentence. The court also made orders for the payment of fines and costs, and for the forfeiture of any property that was used in the commission of the offence. The court's decision was based on a careful consideration of the evidence and the applicable law, and represented the outcome of a fair and impartial trial.
The legal issues that the court was required to decide included whether the prosecution had proved the elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt, whether the evidence of the complainant was reliable and credible, and whether there were any grounds for the accused to be acquitted. The court also had to consider any defence arguments that were raised by the accused, such as the possibility of consent or mistake.
The court's reasoning and outcome were based on the evidence presented in the trial, including witness testimony, expert evidence, and any other relevant material. The court had to weigh the evidence and determine whether it was sufficient to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The court also had to consider any legal arguments that were raised by either party, and apply the relevant principles of law to the facts of the case. Ultimately, the court found the accused guilty of the offence and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
The final orders made by the court included a finding of guilt, a sentence of imprisonment, and any other orders that were necessary to give effect to the sentence. The court also made orders for the payment of fines and costs, and for the forfeiture of any property that was used in the commission of the offence. The court's decision was based on a careful consideration of the evidence and the applicable law, and represented the outcome of a fair and impartial trial.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.