Katz v. State of Western Australia
GPTKB entity
Properties (56)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
criminal appeal
CA_123_of_2017 |
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_Western_Australia
appellate court |
| gptkbp:date |
January 10, 2018
|
| gptkbp:gameFeatures |
Katz
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Katz v. State of Western Australia
|
| gptkbp:impact |
legal reforms
|
| gptkbp:judges |
Justice_McLure
Justice_Beech Justice_Tottle |
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
gptkb:Western_Australia
|
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
criminal law
right to a fair trial evidence admissibility |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
defense attorney
prosecutor |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Australian_law
|
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
considers ethical implications
discusses legal precedents considers public interest involves appeal against conviction highlights importance of legal representation [2018] WASCA 3 addresses challenges faced by defendants addresses issues of bias addresses procedural fairness analyzes impact on legal education analyzes legal standards analyzes prosecutorial conduct analyzes systemic issues in legal system assesses impact on future trials considers implications for justice system considers implications for legal policy discusses implications for defendants discusses judicial discretion discusses role of legal aid discusses role of the judiciary evaluates effectiveness of legal arguments evaluates evidentiary rules examines access to justice examines evidence handling examines public perception of justice examines role of juries highlights need for legal reform highlights rights of the accused reviews appellate standards reviews trial court's decisions |
| gptkbp:outcome |
appeal allowed
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
influences future cases
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:R_v._Smith
gptkb:R_v._Brown |
| gptkbp:respondsTo |
State of Western Australia
|
| gptkbp:significance |
impact on criminal procedure
|
| gptkbp:year |
2018
|