LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, THURSDAY, 14 MAY 2020
HOBART
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00 a.m.
For Bail Application by video link to
Risdon Prison Complex
Steven Craig Murtagh
2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application by video link to
Risdon Prison Complex
Levi Joseph David Hall
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Bail Application
Corey Wordsworth
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Mention
Jarod Leigh Cashion
For Sentence via video link to Court 1,
Alexander Street, Burnie
Krishna Kali Brown
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Rachelle Maree O’Brien
Magnus Colby Oakley
For Plea
Steven Wayne Oldham
For Bail Application
David Wayne Wood
Jake Mark Pearce
Not Before 12:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Caleb Anthony Paul Woods
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9.15 am
Commonwealth Bank of Australia v
Marcus Theo Hairon
Possession
11 am
Chamber matter
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Plea via Video Link
Albert Frederick Riley
BURNIE
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application by video link to
Risdon Prison Complex
Levi Joseph David Hall
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Sentence via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Krishna Kali Brown
Details
- Case
- [2020] TASSCCourtlist 476
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice ESTCOURT presided over a criminal jurisdiction case involving a bail application by video link from Risdon Prison Complex. The applicant, Steven Craig Murtagh, sought bail in relation to a pending criminal matter. The legal issues at hand pertained to the criteria for granting bail as outlined in the Bail Act, specifically assessing the risk of flight, the risk of offending while on bail, and the seriousness of the offence.
Justice ESTCOURT meticulously examined the evidence presented and the arguments from both the prosecution and the defence. The court considered the principles of proportionality and the presumption of innocence, weighing these against the potential risk to the community. Ultimately, the court determined that the risk of reoffending while on bail was sufficiently high, and granted bail was not warranted under the circumstances. The judge's decision was based on the seriousness of the charges against Mr. Murtagh and the potential threat to the community if he were released.
Justice ESTCOURT's ruling was clear and concise, reflecting a thorough understanding of the statutory requirements and the principles of bail law. The court denied the application for bail, noting that the risk factors outweighed any potential benefits of releasing Mr. Murtagh on bail. This decision underscored the importance of balancing individual rights with public safety considerations in bail applications.
Justice ESTCOURT meticulously examined the evidence presented and the arguments from both the prosecution and the defence. The court considered the principles of proportionality and the presumption of innocence, weighing these against the potential risk to the community. Ultimately, the court determined that the risk of reoffending while on bail was sufficiently high, and granted bail was not warranted under the circumstances. The judge's decision was based on the seriousness of the charges against Mr. Murtagh and the potential threat to the community if he were released.
Justice ESTCOURT's ruling was clear and concise, reflecting a thorough understanding of the statutory requirements and the principles of bail law. The court denied the application for bail, noting that the risk factors outweighed any potential benefits of releasing Mr. Murtagh on bail. This decision underscored the importance of balancing individual rights with public safety considerations in bail applications.
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.