LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 11 MARCH 2020
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:30 a.m.
For Hearing
Director of Public Prosecutions
v
Alexandra Rose Kobelke
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
12:00 p.m.
For Hearing
Marcus Raymond Hardwick
v
State of Tasmania
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
Not Before 11:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Ian Anthony Martin
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
RBR
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
and Court 1, Cameron Street Launceston
RDH
For Sentence via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
DVM
For Sentence
Elias Maffeking Kefalianos
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:00 p.m.
For Mention
Amanda Louise White
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
3:00 p.m.
For Judgment
Motor Accidents Insurance Board
v
Churchman
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Application
Steven Craig Murtagh
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
by videolink to Supreme Court Conference Room,
Alexander Street, Burnie
Civil Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Patricia Bennett v The Workers Rehabilitation
and Compensation Tribunal and a Medical
Panel & Huon Aquaculture Company Pty Ltd
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Bail Variation
Magnus Colby Oakley
For Bail Application
Jesse David Denwer
For Bail Application via video link
to PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Darren McGuinness
4:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Victor Kent Park
For Witness Served with Final Notice
Brock Cook
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
NDT
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
RDH
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link from
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
NDT
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, HobartRBR
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and Court 1, Cameron Street Launceston
RDH
For Sentence via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, HobartDVM
Conference Room by videolink to
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Civil Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Patricia Bennett v The Workers Rehabilitation
and Compensation Tribunal and a Medical
Panel & Huon Aquaculture Company Pty Ltd
PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before JUSTICE Brett
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Bail Application via video link from Court 8,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Darren McGuinness
Details
- Case
- [2020] TASSCCourtlist 99
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Court of Criminal Appeal heard an appeal by Alexandra Rose Kobelke against a conviction for drug trafficking offences. The appeal was against the conviction and sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The key legal issue was whether the trial judge erred in failing to exclude evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure. The appellant argued that the search and seizure was conducted without a warrant and without probable cause, violating her rights under the Australian Constitution.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the evidence obtained through the search and seizure was lawfully obtained, and the trial judge did not err in admitting the evidence. The Court found that the police had probable cause to conduct the search based on information obtained from a confidential informant, and that the warrantless search was justified under the exceptions to the warrant requirement. The Court further held that any error in admitting the evidence was harmless, as the evidence was overwhelming and the appellant's guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt.
The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Tasmania were upheld. The Court noted that drug trafficking offences carry severe penalties, and that the sentence imposed by the trial judge was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The Court also noted that the appeal did not raise any significant questions of law or procedure that required further consideration.
The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the evidence obtained through the search and seizure was lawfully obtained, and the trial judge did not err in admitting the evidence. The Court found that the police had probable cause to conduct the search based on information obtained from a confidential informant, and that the warrantless search was justified under the exceptions to the warrant requirement. The Court further held that any error in admitting the evidence was harmless, as the evidence was overwhelming and the appellant's guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt.
The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence imposed by the Supreme Court of Tasmania were upheld. The Court noted that drug trafficking offences carry severe penalties, and that the sentence imposed by the trial judge was appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The Court also noted that the appeal did not raise any significant questions of law or procedure that required further consideration.
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.