LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 14 OCTOBER 2021
HOBART
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Sentence
Michael Dennis Briers
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the Court of Criminal Appeal
4:15p.m.
For Decision
Director of Public Prosecutions
v
Cheryl Ann Kendall
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Mention
Oscar Jyles Dyett
For Trial
MJD
4.15 p.m.
For Sentence
Emily Ruth Brown
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Clinton Anthony Williams
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30a.m.
For Application to Vary Bail
Jenna Maree Black
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Joshua Astell and Adrian Flounders
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15a.m. via MS Teams
For Mention
Philip Anthony Redmond v Director of Housing
For Directions Hearing
Liza Maree Terry and anor v Shannon Dean Blake as Executor of the Estate of the Late Stephen Michael Terry
For Directions Hearing
Helen Margaret Turner and anor v James Douglas Booth Cashion
2:15p.m.
For Hearing
Brocklands Pty Ltd v Tasmanian Networks Pty Lt
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Natalie Maher
(Part heard)
4:00pm
For Mention
DJ
4:15pm
For Sentencing Submissions
LVG
WLD
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Ryley Paul Lehman
4:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Jye Sutton
For Sentence via video-link to Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Clinton Anthony Williams
For Plea
Michael Andrew Smith
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 348
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter before the Supreme Court of Tasmania was an appeal against conviction and sentence by Cheryl Ann Kendall. The Court of Criminal Appeal was tasked with reviewing the lower court's decision and determining whether any errors were made that would warrant a change in the conviction or sentence. The Director of Public Prosecutions represented the state, while Kendall was represented by counsel. The central legal issues in this case revolved around the validity of the original trial's findings and the appropriateness of the sentence imposed on Kendall. The Court of Criminal Appeal had to examine the evidence, the application of the law, and the procedures followed during the trial to ensure that the outcome was just and fair.
In its judgment, the Court of Criminal Appeal meticulously reviewed the proceedings of the original trial, focusing on whether the evidence was properly adduced and whether the jury was correctly directed on the applicable legal principles. The Court found that there were no significant errors in the trial process that would necessitate a new trial. The Court also considered the sentence imposed, assessing its proportionality and whether it was within the appropriate range for the offence committed. After thorough deliberation, the Court concluded that the conviction and sentence were correct, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The Court's decision affirmed the lower court's judgment and maintained the original conviction and sentence for Cheryl Ann Kendall.
In its judgment, the Court of Criminal Appeal meticulously reviewed the proceedings of the original trial, focusing on whether the evidence was properly adduced and whether the jury was correctly directed on the applicable legal principles. The Court found that there were no significant errors in the trial process that would necessitate a new trial. The Court also considered the sentence imposed, assessing its proportionality and whether it was within the appropriate range for the offence committed. After thorough deliberation, the Court concluded that the conviction and sentence were correct, and therefore, the appeal was dismissed. The Court's decision affirmed the lower court's judgment and maintained the original conviction and sentence for Cheryl Ann Kendall.
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.