SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 22 SEPTEMBER 2012
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the Court of Criminal Appeal
10.00 a.m.
For Hearing
Blaze Christian Roberts
v
State of Tasmania
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
9.45 am
For Sentence
Leigh Alexander Graham
Anne Patricia Hoggett
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Mention
Tanya Maree Devine
Jasmine Leanne Smith
Judd Paul Kraemers
William Eric Yabsley
For Directions
LAP
For Facts and Sentence
Jonathon Patrick Fox
Renee Michelle Barker
NL
HCH
JAK
For Plea
Shaun William Hill
Alicia Simone Arnol
Shannon John Elmore
Anthony Michael Blackaby
Damien Thomas Bell
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9.15 a.m.
Via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business
10.00 a.m.
Via video link to Burnie
Chamber Matter
11.30 a.m.
Timetable/Expert Proofs/Rule 261 Schedule
Boat Harbour Beach Blue Waters Pty Ltd
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
Strata Corporation
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
Archer
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
Williams & Anor
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
Wilson & Anor
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
Luttmer & Anor
v
Matthews Properties Pty Ltd & Ors
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:
- AGLC
- Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 22 September 2012 [2012] TASSCCourtlist 181
- Case
- [2012] TASSCCourtlist 181
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the Court of Criminal Appeal include the correctness of the trial court's interpretation of the law, the admissibility and weight of evidence presented, and the appropriateness of the sentence in light of the circumstances of the case and relevant sentencing principles. The appellant's legal representatives are likely to argue that there were errors in the trial process that affected the outcome, and that the sentence imposed was either too severe or not commensurate with the offence.
The Court of Criminal Appeal carefully considered the arguments presented by both parties, including the appellant's claims of error and the respondent's defence of the trial court's decisions. The Court evaluated the evidence, the application of the law, and the proportionality of the sentence. Ultimately, the Court found that the trial court's decisions were legally sound, and the sentence was appropriate given the circumstances. Therefore, the Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower court.
The final orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal are that the appeal is dismissed, the conviction and sentence of the lower court are affirmed, and the appellant remains subject to the sentence imposed. The appellant has the right to seek special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia, although such appeals are rarely successful.
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.