Law Lists For the Supreme Court Of Tasmania, Monday, 4 May 2020HOBARTCourt 7, Salamanca Place, HobartBefore Chief Justice BLOWCriminal Jurisdiction10:00 a.m.For Sentence via video linkMatthew Paul DodgeCourt 8,

Case [2020] TASSCCourtlist 371


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, MONDAY, 4 MAY 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Sentence via video link
Matthew Paul Dodge

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Margaret Anne Otto

For Plea
Duc Van Nguyen

For Bail Application
William Davidson
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Jake Paul Killy-Vear Moltoni
Alani Povalu Moeakiola
David Hau Moeakiola
Joshua Blair Read
Jason Clifford Gordon
George Mervyn Walsh
Nicholas John Wright
Trisha Jean Gordon

10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Chantelle Tierre Robertson
Christian Niel Shearing
Brian Francis McKenzie
Craig John Smith
Joshua David Donaghy

11:00am
For Plea
Kenneth James Siely

For Bail Consent
Christopher John Worker
Steven Wayne Oldham MLVT IRK
Georgia Skrepetos
Craig John Smith
WSB
Aaron Dean Eaves
Jordyn Jack Webb
Ryan Edward Brown
Joe Robert Moeakiola
Biniyam Tewoldebirhan Hagos
Hossein Karimi
Mohammad Heidari
Jayy Scott Tuanh Venables
Matthew Steven McCulloch
James Christopher Steven Flaskas
JAJ
Kendall Domkus
Patrick Simon Bailey
Lachlan Justin Plummer
BJH
AKM 

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9.20 am
Holly Joy Rowlands v Neil Lyndon Grice
Directions hearing by telephone

11 am
Carbine Club of Tasmania Association (Inc) v
Michael John Wisby
Assessment of damages

12 midday
Donald Graham Thompson v Brian Neil Lovell
Vacate trial date

Kaye Lunardelli v Brian Neil Lovell
Vacate trial date

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Plea via Video Link
Michael Rodney Smith

For Application to Withdraw as Surety
Sammual Clinton Wilmot

For Plea
Devin Theodore Eilander

2:15p.m.
For Sentence via Video Link

Patrick Charles Curbishley

BURNIE

NO LAW  LIST FOR BURNIE

Details
Case
[2020] TASSCCourtlist 371
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard several criminal cases on Monday, 4 May 2020. One of the cases was the sentencing of Matthew Paul Dodge, who appeared via video link from Court 8 in Salamanca Place, Hobart. The court was presided over by Justice Brett. Dodge faced sentencing following a conviction, and the hearing was conducted in a virtual format due to restrictions in place at the time.

The legal issue the court had to decide was the appropriate sentence for Dodge, taking into account the nature and circumstances of the offence, as well as any mitigating or aggravating factors. Sentencing in criminal cases involves a consideration of various legal principles, including the principles of proportionality and deterrence, as well as the need to protect the community and provide any necessary rehabilitation for the offender.

After hearing arguments from both the prosecution and the defence, the court determined the appropriate sentence for Dodge. The court considered the aggravating factors, such as the seriousness of the offence and Dodge's criminal history, as well as any mitigating factors, such as his cooperation with authorities or any personal circumstances that may have contributed to his offending behaviour. The court also took into account any submissions made on behalf of Dodge's family or other supporters. Following this comprehensive review, the court delivered its sentencing decision, which was communicated to Dodge via the video link.

The final orders of the court included the imposition of a custodial sentence, the length of which was determined based on the court's assessment of the relevant factors. The court also made orders for any fines, restitution, or other penalties that were appropriate in the circumstances. The sentence was designed to achieve the objectives of punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation, while also considering the interests of the victim and the community.

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.