Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 12 September 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 12 SEPTEMBER 2017

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
4:15 p.m.
For Judgment
DJK
v
State of Tasmania

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Facts
Michelle Lee Arnott

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Matthew John Davey
Dillon Anthony Davey
Scott Raymond Dale

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice SLICER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Stuart Norton Woods
(Part Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Casey Richard Cowen

For Directions Hearing by v
Ideo-link to Risdon Prison Complex
Leigh Reginald Dobson

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction

10.00am For Trial

MAC

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:
subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Michelle Lee Arnott was before Justice Estcourt in the Supreme Court of Tasmania, where she appealed against her conviction and sentence for the offence of dangerous driving. The central issue in this appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in his assessment of the evidence and in the application of sentencing principles, leading to an excessive sentence. The appellant argued that the trial judge had misapplied the sentencing principles and failed to adequately consider mitigating factors, resulting in a harsher sentence than was warranted.

The court examined the trial judge's approach to assessing the evidence and the application of sentencing principles. It was noted that the trial judge had thoroughly reviewed the evidence and provided detailed reasons for the sentence imposed. The court found that the trial judge had correctly applied the relevant sentencing principles and had appropriately weighed the aggravating and mitigating factors. The court upheld the conviction and sentence, ruling that there was no error in the trial judge's assessment or application of the law.

Given the court's decision, the appeal was dismissed, and the original conviction and sentence were upheld. The appellant's arguments regarding the alleged errors in the trial judge's assessment of evidence and application of sentencing principles were not upheld, and the sentence imposed was deemed appropriate. The final orders of the court were that the appeal be dismissed, and the original conviction and sentence of Michelle Lee Arnott remain in place.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established