Clarke v Kirby
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 01 January 1998 |
Date | 01 January 1998 |
Court | High Court |
- Right of accused to legal representation - Applicant charged and brought before District Court - Applicant asked whether pleading guilty or not guilty - Community service order made - Applicant not informed of right to apply for legal aid or legal representation - Whether there was a real possibility of being imprisoned -Criminal Justice (Community Service) Act, 1983. (No. 23), s. 2.
-
S. 2 of the Criminal Justice (Community Service) Act, 1983, provides, inter alia, that a community service order may be made in respect of a person who is of or over sixteen years of age and is convicted of an offence for which, in the opinion of the court, the appropriate sentence would, but for the Act, be one of imprisonment. On 3 March, 1997, the applicant was arrested and brought to Blackrock Garda Station. He was charged with being intoxicated to the extent that he might endanger himself, with intending to provoke a breach of the peace and with being guilty of violent behaviour. On the first date in court the applicant pleaded guilty and the matter was adjourned to 7 April, 1997, when a community service order was made. Upon admitting the charges, the first named respondent asked the applicant if there was any reason why he should not be sent to prison for fourteen days, to which there was no reply. The judge indicated, after being informed that the applicant worked in the telephone business, that he would impose a community service order of 60 hours. The applicant instituted judicial review proceedings claiming that at no time during the hearing in the District Court was he informed of his entitlement to apply for legal aid or legal representation. He submitted that as soon as the judge of the District Court contemplated the imposition of a custodial sentence, he ought to have informed the applicant of these entitlements. He also submitted that before a community service order is made the judge must have formed the opinion that the appropriate sentence would be one of, inter alia, imprisonment. Held by Shanley J. in quashing the orders made by the first named respondent and remitting the matter to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Minister for Justice and Equality v Marjasz
...v Donoghue [1976] IR 325; Cahill v Reilly [1994] 3 IR 547; McSorley v Governor of Mountjoy Prison [1996] 2 ILRM 331; Clarke v Kirby [1998] 2 ILRM 30; Leonard v Garavan [2003] 4 IR 60; Nottinghamshire County Council v B [2011] IESC 48 (Unrep, SC, 15/12/2011); Attorney General v Dyer [2......
-
Leonard v District Judge Garavan
...1 All E.R. 208. Byrne v. McDonnell [1997] 1 I.R. 392; [1996] 1 I.L.R.M. 543. Cahill v. Reilly [1994] 3 I.R. 547. Clarke v. Kirby [1998] 2 I.L.R.M. 30. D. v. Director of Public Prosecutions [1994] 2 I.R. 465; [1994] 1 I.L.R.M. 435. Farrell v. Attorney General [1998] 1 I.R. 203; [1998] 1 I.L.......
-
Gareth Whelan v District Court Judge Thomas Fitzpatrick and DPP
...ACT 1994 S13(3) CRIMINAL JUSTICE (LEGAL AID) ACT 1962 S2(1)(a) CRIMINAL JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1997 S5(6) CLARKE v KIRBY 1998 2 ILRM 30 HEALY, STATE v DONOGHUE 1976 IR 325 CRIMINAL JUSTICE (LEGAL AID) ACT 1962 S2(2) SHARPE LTD v DUBLIN CITY & COUNTY MANAGER 1989 IR 701 CI......
-
Mark Gilmartin v Judge Murphy and DPP
...2 IR 169 SHEEHAN V RILEY 1993 2 IR 81 HEALY V DONOGHUE 1976 IR 325 MCSORLEY V GOV OF MOUNTJOY PRISON 1996 2 IRLM 331 CLARKE V KIRBY 1998 2 ILRM 30 1 Mr Justice Kearnsdelivered this 23rd day of February, 2On the 6th day of July, 2000 the Applicant appeared before the first named Respondent......