Legal Research
Cases
Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 7 May 2012

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 7 May 2012

Case [2012] TASSCCourtlist 74

Criminal Liability

Sentencing

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY, 7 MAY 2012

HOBART LIST

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
9.30 a.m.
For Hearing
Joshua Andrew Potts
v
Darren Stephen Ian Frost

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2.15 p.m.
For Facts
Scott Lester Roberts

3.30 p.m.
For Sentence
TCT

4.15 p.m.
For Application Pursuant to Sentencing Act 1997

Gavin Raymond McIntosh

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Pre-Trial Conference
Johnstone, McGee & Gandy Pty Ltd
v
Hockey Tasmania Incorporated and Ors

LAUNCESTON

No Law List for Launceston

BURNIE

No Law List for Burnie

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:

Details

AGLC: Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 7 May 2012 [2012] TASSCCourtlist 74
Case: [2012] TASSCCourtlist 74
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a case between Joshua Andrew Potts and Darren Stephen Ian Frost. The nature of the dispute was not specified in the law list, but it was heard in the criminal jurisdiction. Darren Frost was scheduled to be sentenced at 2.15 pm in Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart.

The court was required to decide on the appropriate sentence for Darren Frost, following a conviction. The legal issues would likely involve the consideration of sentencing principles, the circumstances of the offence, and any mitigating or aggravating factors. The court also had to consider the submissions from both the prosecution and the defence, as well as any relevant statutory guidelines and precedents.

The reasoning and outcome of the court were not detailed in the law list. However, it is expected that Justice WOOD considered the aggravating and mitigating factors, the principles of sentencing, and the relevant laws and precedents before delivering the sentence. The final orders would have been communicated to the parties involved, but the specific details were not provided in the law list.

No further cases or matters were scheduled for the Hobart list on that day. The Launceston and Burnie law lists were not available, and email subscriptions for other courts could be requested as indicated.

Orders