Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 14 March 2014 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 14 MARCH 2014

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
9:45 a.m.
For Judgment
Brett Corey Pickett
v
State of Tasmania

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Decision
Peter Stephen Bomford

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction

2:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Emma Lillian Rainbird
Timothy Geoffrey Briers
Robert Maxwell Brown

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:30 a.m.
In Court as In Chambers
Bail Application
Tarin Tot

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Judgment via video link to Court 2, Supreme Court, Launceston
Timothy James Tubb
v
Christopher Peter Reissig

Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
Bail Application
Matthew Robert Agnew

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.
Via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business

11:30 a.m.
Amend proceedings/Enter Judgment
Via video link to Launceston
Gunns Finance Pty Ltd
v
Ferris & Anor

LAUNCESTON
No list for Launceston

BURNIE

No list for Burnie
______________________________________________________
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Brett Corey Pickett has appealed against his conviction and sentence in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The appeal was heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal before the Chief Justice Blow. The legal issues before the court involved the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction and the appropriateness of the sentence imposed. The court considered whether there were any errors in the trial proceedings that could have affected the outcome. After a thorough examination of the evidence and the trial judge's findings, the Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction but varied the sentence. The court determined that while the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the original sentence was too severe given the circumstances of the case.

The court's reasoning focused on the balance between deterrence and rehabilitation in sentencing. It noted that while the offence was serious, the offender's background and potential for rehabilitation should be considered. The court also highlighted the need for consistency in sentencing within similar cases. By reducing the sentence, the Court of Criminal Appeal aimed to ensure that the punishment was proportionate and aligned with broader sentencing principles. The appeal was partially successful, with the conviction remaining but the sentence being adjusted.

The final orders of the court included a confirmation of the conviction but a modification of the sentence to reflect the court's findings on proportionality and rehabilitation. The offender was to serve a reduced term in custody, with specific conditions attached to his parole. This decision provides clarity on the appropriate sentence for the offence, taking into account both the seriousness of the crime and the individual circumstances of the offender.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 14 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established