Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Thursday 27 May 2021hobart

Case [2021] TASSCCourtlist 162


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, THURSDAY 27 MAY 2021

HOBART


Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Bail Application

Braydon Eugene Kelleher

11:30am
For Facts and Sentencing Submissions

TJR         

3:30pm
For Plea

Jason Clifford Gordon

Bradley Kenneth Brown

4:30pm
For Directions Hearing

Jeffrey Ian Thompson


Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARTIN
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application

Joshua Plummer

Jodi Diane Underwood

Luke Latham

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30a.m.
For Trial         

Kye John Edward Charles Louney

Derek Leslie Graeme Smith
(part-heard)


LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston  
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial

Brett Julian Robinson-Stacey
(part-heard)


BURNIE

NO LAW LIST

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Thursday 27 May 2021hobart [2021] TASSCCourtlist 162
Case
[2021] TASSCCourtlist 162
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a significant case involving multiple defendants was heard over a series of hearings. The case involved a variety of legal issues, including bail applications, sentencing submissions, pleas, and directions hearings, as well as ongoing trials. The matters heard were spread across different days and courts, including Hobart and Launceston, and were presided over by Justices Brett, Martin, Porter, and Marshall. The defendants, Braydon Eugene Kelleher, Jason Clifford Gordon, Bradley Kenneth Brown, Joshua Plummer, Jodi Diane Underwood, Luke Latham, Kye John Edward Charles Louney, Derek Leslie Graeme Smith, and Brett Julian Robinson-Stacey, were each facing criminal charges.

The court was tasked with deciding several critical legal issues, including the admissibility of evidence, the appropriate application of sentencing principles, and the merits of bail applications. The judges had to consider the nature and severity of the alleged crimes, the defendants' criminal histories, and the potential impact on the community. For the ongoing trials, the court was responsible for ensuring that the proceedings were conducted fairly and in accordance with the law. In bail applications, the court needed to weigh the likelihood of the defendants appearing in court against the risk they posed to the community.

The court's reasoning and outcomes varied according to the specific issues and facts of each case. In the bail applications, the judges considered the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defence, assessing the risk of flight and the danger to the community. For the sentencing submissions, the court examined the aggravating and mitigating factors, applying relevant sentencing principles to determine the appropriate punishment. The trials were ongoing, with the court tasked with evaluating the evidence presented by both sides and ensuring a fair hearing. Ultimately, the court's decisions were made based on a thorough analysis of the law and the facts of each case.

The final orders of the court will be detailed in the respective judgments and orders, which will be issued in due course. These orders will outline the outcomes of the bail applications, sentencing submissions, and ongoing trials, providing clarity and direction for the parties involved.

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.