DPP v Healy
1985 WJSC-CCA 141
Court of Criminal Appeal
DPP V MCKEON UNREP CCA 12.12.84 1985/1/157
Preparation - Opportunity - Prisoner - Confiscation of document - Adequate opportunity to prepare defence despite failure to return document - Accused withdrawing instructions from counsel and solicitor - (65/1983 - C.C.A. - 12/12/84) - 3 Frewen 11
The People v. Healy
Relevance - Witness - Threat - Fact of threat disclosed to trial judge - Propriety of disclosure - Trial judge not attributing threat to conduct of accused - (65/1983 - C.C.A. - 12/12/84)
The People v. Healy
This is an application for Leave to Appeal against the conviction of the Applicant by the Special Criminal Court on 23rd of June 1983 of the offence of robbery in respect of which he was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment and in respect of an offence of carrying a firearm with intent to commit robbery in respect of which he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
The Applicant appeared in person at the trial and submitted and prosecuted his own appeal before this Court. His grounds of appeal submitted in writing were as follows:-
2 "(1) My Constitutional right to prepare a proper defence was taken from me by the confiscation of my written legal instructions in Portlaoise Prison. Therefore my trial was not a fair one.
(2) During the trial, evidence was given that men armed with rifles threatened two witnesses, Mr. and Mrs. Ryan, in the early hours of the first day of the trial. The President of the Court said after hearing this “that this is most prejudicial to the Accused”. The Prosecutor made known to the Court that he accepted that the other Accused, Mr. McKeon, had nothing to do with such threats and the Court in accepting this and giving consideration to it acted in a very unfair manner to me.
(3) I want to appeal against the conviction on the weight of the evidence. The President of the Court told me I could do this".
Upon the hearing of this Appeal, the Applicant did not develop any of these grounds of appeal to any extent but did with the permission of the Court insofar as the Ground No. 3 was concerned adopt arguments and submissions which had been made by Counsel on behalf of an applicant, Sean McKeon, who was jointly indicted with this Applicant in respect of these offences and whose appeal against conviction was heard immediately prior to the hearing of this application and in the presence of this Applicant.
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL