Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 22 August 2018

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 22 AUGUST 2018

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
2:15 p.m.
For Judgment
Aaron John Cleaver
v
State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:30 p.m.
For Facts and Sentence
Nathan Alan Denny-Garrett

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Peter Jeffrey Rose

For Directions via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Heath Lance Chatters v State of Tasmania

For Directions Hearing
DJT
v
State of Tasmania

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
9:30 a.m.
For Decision via video link from
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Lorraine Elizabeth Jordan
v
Criminal Injuries Compensation Commission – Commissioner F Neasey

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

11:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Susan Blyth Neill-Fraser
v
State of Tasmania
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Matthew Clifford Hingston

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:30 a.m.
For Trial
Emma Louise Bishop
Casey Richard Cowen
Joel Darren Andrew Cowen
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Robert Leigh Cowen

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
Directions hearing
Gunns Limited and ors
v
KPMG and ors

Gunns Limited and ors
v
Christopher James Newton and ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers

9:30am For Decision via video link from
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Lorraine Elizabeth Jordan
v
Criminal Injuries Compensation Commission – Commissioner F Neasey

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm For Sentence via video link from
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Matthew Clifford Hingston

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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case was heard before Chief Justice Blow, where Aaron John Cleaver was the appellant, and the State of Tasmania was the respondent. The appellant, Cleaver, was appealing against his conviction and sentence for criminal offences, which had been determined in a lower court. The legal issues before the court involved the validity of the appellant's conviction, the sentence imposed, and whether there were any procedural errors in the trial that could have affected the outcome. The court was required to carefully examine the evidence presented, the legal principles applied in the lower court, and the appropriateness of the sentence in light of the appellant's circumstances.

The court's reasoning in this case focused on the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction, the application of legal principles during the trial, and the proportionality of the sentence. The Chief Justice considered whether the lower court had correctly interpreted the law, whether the appellant's rights were properly safeguarded, and if the sentence was just and appropriate given the nature of the offences and the appellant's background. After a thorough review, the court found that the evidence was sufficient to uphold the conviction and that no procedural errors had occurred that would warrant a different outcome. The Chief Justice also determined that the sentence was appropriate and proportionate to the crimes committed.

As a result of the court's decision, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence as determined by the lower court were upheld. The final orders of the court confirmed the appellant's conviction on all counts and the sentence previously imposed. This decision ensures that the lower court's judgment stands, and the appellant will continue to serve his sentence as determined.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established