DPP v Corbally

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Keane C.J.
• Judgment Date: 10 February 2003
• Neutral Citation: 2003 WJSC-CCA 3180
• Date: 10 February 2003
• Court: Court of Criminal Appeal

2003 WJSC-CCA 3180

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Keane C.J.

O'Sullivan J.

Gilligan J.

108/99

DPP v. CORBALLY

THE PEOPLE AT THE SUIT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

-V-

PATRICK CORBALLY

APPLICANT

Synopsis:

CRIMINAL LAW

Fair procedures

Firearms conviction - Possession of ammunition - Failure by witness to appear at trial - Evidence - Whether applicant received fair trial - Whether all relevant evidence made available to defence (108/1999 - Court of Criminal Appeal - 10/2/2003)

People (DPP) v Corbally

Facts: The applicant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for on a firearms offence and for possession of ammunition. The applicant claimed that the non-attendance by a witness at his trial rendered the trial unsatisfactory. It was contended that if the jury had heard the evidence of the witness in question that this would have raised a reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury and that consequently the present guilty verdict should not be allowed to stand. In addition criticism was made of the manner that a conversation between two of the principal potential witnesses was facilitated by Gardaí.

Held by the Court of Criminal Appeal in refusing leave to appeal. There had not been any failure by the prosecution to disclose material evidence to the defence. The jury fully considered the matter and had been satisfied by the evidence adduced that the applicant was guilty of the offences in question. Even if the witness complained of had appeared at the trial and had given evidence in favour of the accused, the prosecution would almost certainly have applied to treat that witness as a hostile witness.

Reporter: R. F.

1 JUDGMENT of the Court (ex tempore) delivered the10th day of February 2003 , by Keane C.J.

2 This is an application for leave to appeal in respect of the conviction of the applicant in the Dublin Circuit (Criminal) Court on the 11 ^th March 1999 on two counts one, of being in possession of firearms with intent to endanger life and the other of being in possession of ammunition with intent to endanger life.

3 The prosecution arose out of an incident on the 11 ^th May 1997, when one Terence Hughes, who gave evidence at the trial, said that he went with a Mr. Seamus Behan on a Sunday morning, sometime between 8 and 9 o'clock, to the house of the applicant at 64 Drumfin Avenue, Ballyfermot. He gave evidence at the trial that on arrival at the house, after some delay, the applicant and his two sons emerged from the house. The applicant was carrying an iron bar and one of his sons was carrying a submachine gun with which he proceeded to shoot Mr. Behan, (i.e., Mr. Hughes's companion on this journey) in the leg. The applicant is alleged then to have instructed the person with the gun not to shoot him, (Mr. Hughes), but to "give him, (i.e., Mr. Behan) another one" whereupon he was again shot for the second time. Other people came on the scene and the gardaí also came on the scene.

4 There was also evidence then from Mr. Hughes that he went in, apparently, against his will, into the applicant's house and saw a radio scanner on the kitchen table which was picking up the conversation between the alleged victim of the shooting, Mr. Behan and the gardaí.

5 There are other witnesses, and the court doesn't find it necessary to go into their evidence, persons who were neighbours who saw at least some of the events, and one of whom certainly...