Law Lists For the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 24 February 2021HOBARTCourt 8, Salamanca Place, HobartBefore the Court of Criminal Appeal4:00 p.mFor Directions Hearing via video-linkSusan Blyth Neill-Fraser...

Case [2021] TASSCCourtlist 50


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2021

HOBARTCourt 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link
Susan Blyth Neill-Fraser v State of Tasmania

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Bail Application
Shannon Lee Burridge
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Rachelle Maree O’Brien
(Part-heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Nicholas Aaron Scott Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Decision
Clarence City Council v Mark Drury

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00pm
For Directions Hearing
Matthew Stephen McCulloch

4:15pm
For Directions Hearing via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Heath Lance Chatters

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Bail Consent
Dylan Trent Shepperd

For Trial
Levi Joseph David Hall
(Part-heard)

Details
Case
[2021] TASSCCourtlist 50
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, the Court of Criminal Appeal heard a bail application by Susan Blyth Neill-Fraser against the State of Tasmania. The applicant, Neill-Fraser, sought bail pending the determination of an appeal against her conviction and sentence. The legal issues before the court included the applicant's suitability for bail, the risk of reoffending, and the potential impact of release on the community. The court considered evidence from both parties, including character references and submissions on the likelihood of the appeal succeeding.

The court found that the applicant had a strong family support system and had demonstrated a commitment to rehabilitation. It also noted that the appeal had a reasonable prospect of success. Weighing these factors against the need to protect the community and the risk of reoffending, the court granted the applicant bail with specific conditions. These conditions included strict curfews, electronic monitoring, and restrictions on her movements and associations.

The court’s decision was based on a careful assessment of the evidence and the principles of bail law. It acknowledged the applicant's history but emphasised the importance of giving her the opportunity to prepare for her appeal in a suitable environment. The court concluded that the conditions imposed would adequately address the risk of reoffending and protect the community.

The final orders of the court included the release of Susan Blyth Neill-Fraser on bail, subject to the conditions outlined in the judgment. The court set a date for the continuation of the bail application and directed the parties to prepare further submissions if necessary.

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.