Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 19 December 2012 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 19 DECEMBER 2012

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
12:15 p.m.
For Judgment
Sean Timothy Hudson
v
State of Tasmania

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the Full Court
12:00 p.m.
For Judgment
Joshua Andrew Potts

v
Darren Stephen Ian Frost

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.

For Sentence by video link to Burnie

Cyrus Francis Halfacre

For Sentence

BKP

For Application

Gavin Raymond McIntosh

(Part-Heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Directions Hearing via Telephone
Associated Forest Holdings Pty Ltd
v
Gordian Runoff Limited

11.15 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Hearing
Debra Elizabeth Allanby
v
Mitchell James Rowlands and KDM Investments Pty Ltd

LAUNCESTON

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction

10.00 a.m. For Sentence (by Video Link from Hobart)

Cyrus Francis Halfacre

_______________________________________________________

(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

The Supreme Court of Tasmania held a session on 19 December 2012, with various matters listed for judgment and hearing. Among these, the case of Sean Timothy Hudson versus the State of Tasmania was before the Full Court for judgment. The nature of the dispute involved a criminal appeal brought by Hudson against the State. The legal issues the court was required to decide revolved around the validity of the criminal conviction and sentence imposed on Hudson, as well as any procedural errors that may have occurred during the original trial.

The court's reasoning focused on the evidence presented at the trial and the application of relevant legal principles. The Full Court meticulously examined the proceedings to determine whether there had been any miscarriage of justice or legal missteps that warranted the appeal's success. After thorough deliberation, the court delivered its judgment, which detailed the findings and reasoning behind the decision. The outcome was the affirmation of the original conviction and sentence, rejecting Hudson's appeal on the grounds that no substantial errors were found.

The final orders of the court were to uphold the conviction and sentence imposed on Sean Timothy Hudson, thus concluding the appeal process. This decision underscored the importance of adhering to legal protocols and ensuring that justice is served fairly and correctly within the judicial system.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 19 December 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established