DPP v Kelly

 
FREE EXCERPT

1989 WJSC-CCA 1323

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

McCarthy J

Egan J

Blayney J

115/1987
DPP v. KELLY (JACKIE)
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
-v-
KELLY

Citations:

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1984 S25(3)

R V ADAMS 52 CAR 588,

R V BATESON 54 CAR 373

PRACTICE DIRECTION 1970 1 WLR 916

Synopsis:

CRIMINAL LAW

Trial

Jury - Verdict - Deliberations - Duration - Minimum period - Statutory provision requiring two hours deliberation where split verdict delivered - Verdict quashed where period less than statutory minimum - Held that the period during which the jury were in court after their initial retirement to consider their verdict was not a period of deliberation for the purposes of s. 25, sub-s. 3, of the Act of 1984: ~R. v. Adams~ (1968) 52 Cr. App. R. 588 not applied - Criminal Justice Act, 1984, s. 25 - (115/87 - C.C. A. - 16/5/88) - [1989] ILRM 370

|The People v. Kelly|

JURY

Verdict

Deliberations - Duration - Minimum period - Split verdict - Trial on indictment - Retirement of jury to consider verdict - Exclusion of subsequent periods during which jury addressed by trial judge - ~See~ Criminal Law, trial - (115/87 - C.C.A. - 16/5/88) - [1989] ILRM 370

|The People v. Kelly|

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
McCarthy J.
1

Section 25 of the Criminal Justice Act1984provides, so far as relevant, as follows:-

"(1) The verdict of a jury in criminal proceedings need not be unanimous in a case where there are not fewer than eleven jurors if ten of them agree on the verdict.

(3) The court shall not accept a verdict by virtue of subsection (1) unless it appears to the court that the jury have had such period of time for deliberation as the court thinks reasonable having regard to the nature and complexity of the case; and the court shall not in any event accept such a verdict unless it appears to the court that the jury have had at least two hours for deliberation."

2

The sole ground of appeal advanced form the hearing of this application was the alleged non-compliance with the requirements of subsection (3). The Applicant was convicted on a count of indecent assault following his trial before his Honour Judge Cassidy at Galway Circuit Court and was sentenced to three years imprisonment. At the conclusion of the judge's charge the jury retired at 3.17 p.m. At 4.03 p.m. they returned and the foreman told the trial judge that the jurors were divided evenly and were unable to arrive at a verdict. They retired again at 4.06 p.m. and, following submissions from council, were recalled at 4.11 p.m. and requested by...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL