Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against conviction for endangerment and other offences, but varies sentence, on the grounds that: (a) the trial judge was within his discretion in admitting certain evidence and was plainly aware of the legal requirements; (b) the evidence was more than sufficient to allow a jury to conclude that the accused had been identified; (c) it was no part of the trial judge’s business to make any observation about the absence of DNA evidence and the defence could have made a submission to the jury as they saw fit; and (d) the trial judge had erred in imposing consecutive sentences in the circumstances of the case.
Appeal against conviction for multiple offences arising out of road traffic incident and of sentences - sentence for unlawful seizure of a vehicle to run consecutively to sentence for endangerment - whether certain evidence ought to have been admitted - whether trial judge should have directed acquittal due to paucity of identification evidence - whether trial judge erred in charging jury as to DNA evidence - whether trial judge in sentencing had adequate regard to mitigating circumstances - whether sentence was disproportionate - whether trial judge erroneously exercised his discretion to impose consecutive sentences.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only fast reporting service for all Irish judgments over the past ten years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now