MAHER
v
STATE OF TASMANIA
[2023] HCASL 208
H2/2023
The applicant seeks special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of Tasmania (Estcourt J and Brett J, Geason J dissenting) dismissing the applicant's appeal against conviction. The applicant seeks an order quashing the applicant's conviction and ordering a retrial.
The application has insufficient prospects of success to warrant a grant of special leave to appeal. Moreover, the application raises no issue of general principle that is of public importance.
Special leave to appeal is refused.
Gageler CJ
Gordon J
Edelman J
Steward J
Gleeson J
Jagot J
Beech-Jones J
7 December 2023
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Maher v State of Tasmania and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2023] HCASL 208
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the Court was whether special leave to appeal should be granted. This required the Court to determine whether the application had sufficient prospects of success and whether it raised any issues of general principle of public importance. The Court considered the merits of the application, the arguments presented, and the law relevant to the appeal.
The Court held that the application did not have sufficient prospects of success, and that it did not raise any issues of general principle of public importance. The Court reasoned that the appeal was unlikely to succeed because the Court of Criminal Appeal had considered the relevant evidence and arguments, and had reached a decision on the merits of the case. The Court also held that the application did not raise any issues of general principle of public importance, and that the matters raised were specific to the case and did not warrant further consideration. Accordingly, the Court refused the application for special leave to appeal.
No orders were made in relation to the application for special leave to appeal, as it was dismissed.
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.